How many deny Jesus Christ in the Eucharist?

[larkin31]

Larkin–

Jesus’ gospel says there would never be enough books written about Him.

The Vatican has the greatest library in the world. All about Jesus. You say we have pages and pages of church teachings…these pages are the result of the Apostles and their successors establishing and maintaining churches all over the world.

You cannot have a stand alone Bible…do you know that I consider that use of Scripture almost an idol because it is being used without the Church…and used to split the faith and unity of people using God’s Word against believers. And to use God’s Word to make division to me is a very common form of evil. It is the Evil One who splits and divides, who creates issues that are entities of their own and take hold of a person’s soul that s/he cannot understand, accept, or digest the truths we share with you.

I discern a real spirit of anxiety and agitation when people come on to dispute the Church, especially the sacraments and most of all the Eucharist, the summit and centrality of our faith…the Word Made Flesh that will bring us to eternal life…not our own works…our works are actually the response of Jesus within us to serve others.

You also said pointed out the spirit comes…The priest places his hands over the gifts of bread and wine for the Epiclises when the Holy Spirit comes down from heaven to turn the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.\

You have to go back to the earliest church practices, you have to acknowledge the church was primitive at its beginning and enduring much persecution. Then there was the Dark Ages when Europe was undergoing constant plundering and destruction by barbarians…

People get so scrupulous about Scripture…even as I see here people being upset that we call the priest Father…we see the context Christ means that only God the Father can provide for us vs the church endearment of calling a priest, ‘Father’, for providing us the Bread of Life.

There have been documents provided here by our ordained Deacon that gives you early documents of the practice of faith.

You have to also realize that Christ forgives church administrators of the past just like he has forgiven you…His mercy is far greater than any human being’s sins. But some how I don’t see the forgiveness of God working through the protestants with their fixations. You have been systematically taught by your leaders to believe such things about the Church, and it is a chronic situation that you can only free yourself.

A person comes to the point to realize that all the explaining won’t suffice until you see the indoctrination that has taken hold of your own soul. Pray for deliverance from false teachers. Pray to find the truth.

Because it requires an act of faith to believe that Christ’s church is indeed the Catholic Church.

Should I take this long response to mean that you, personally, don’t want to explain the logic either? As a statement of faith, I accept infallibility. As a claim from logic, we need to actually SEE the logic in order to judge it.

 

[larkin31]

I am aghast that you cannot see the logic in something so evident and so simple. Before I respond would you mind telling me why you feel that my statement is illogical?

Blessings
Cinette*

You have provided no argument at all yet, so it is neither logical nor illogical. You need to provide a series of claims, based on logical reasoning, in order to assert that you are actually being “logical.” Once you write out s series of statements and assert what reasoning you are using, then I will tell you how logical I think it is.

 

[KathleenGee]

I don’t see your ‘logic’, Larkin.

Christ did not come here to pass out Bibles, and there are countless testimonies of the life of faith and God’s intervention that do not use ‘logic’…I don’t know what kind of logic you are proposing here.

Pentecost was not logical. The apostles were speaking in tongues…not using logic. They went out to spread the Good News, lay hands and heal, forgive sins through Christ, select bishops and successors who could fully absorb the totality of Christ’s message and admininstrate a church…

It is a matter of fidelity to the Oral Tradition of Christ, His apostles, and building the universal church to be our nourishment and guide in living the life of Christ. Just going back and forth with Bible quotes…the Sunday Mass takes 3 years to go through the entire Bible…we hear the Bible at every Mass. It is the best place to understand Scripture.

The Lord has invited us to the banquet table…to partake of the Eucharist, broken for our salvation and redemption to enable us each day to begin again renewed.

There is so much more to Christianity than simply looking at individualistic Bible passages that defy Christ’s Oral Tradition and the apostles…it is finding Jesus Christ alive in His…His Church. The Church provides us such a life in Christ–the Word of God, the sacraments, the communion of saints, the liturgical year, the great unity of universal faith that transcends races, cultures, and regions – that it is truly Christ’s kingdom on earth. Those Catholics who are in serious sin are not in the Church and not in His kingdom so you can’t condemn it because of those who cause scandal. Because then you are further rejecting what you do not know.

 

[KathleenGee]

Larkin,

Again because of your manner of orientation, it would probably be more conducive for you to get hold of a catechism and the documents on liturgy of Vatican II.

 

[larkin31]

I don’t see your ‘logic’, Larkin.

Christ did not come here to pass out Bibles, and there are countless testimonies of the life of faith and God’s intervention that do not use ‘logic’…I don’t know what kind of logic you are proposing here.

Pentecost was not logical. The apostles were speaking in tongues…not using logic. They went out to spread the Good News, lay hands and heal, forgive sins through Christ, select bishops and successors who could fully absorb the totality of Christ’s message and admininstrate a church…

It is a matter of fidelity to the Oral Tradition of Christ, His apostles, and building the universal church to be our nourishment and guide in living the life of Christ. Just going back and forth with Bible quotes…the Sunday Mass takes 3 years to go through the entire Bible…we hear the Bible at every Mass. It is the best place to understand Scripture.

The Lord has invited us to the banquet table…to partake of the Eucharist, broken for our salvation and redemption to enable us each day to begin again renewed.

There is so much more to Christianity than simply looking at individualistic Bible passages that defy Christ’s Oral Tradition and the apostles…it is finding Jesus Christ alive in His…His Church. The Church provides us such a life in Christ–the Word of God, the sacraments, the communion of saints, the liturgical year, the great unity of universal faith that transcends races, cultures, and regions – that it is truly Christ’s kingdom on earth. Those Catholics who are in serious sin are not in the Church and not in His kingdom so you can’t condemn it because of those who cause scandal. Because then you are further rejecting what you do not know.

KathleenGee, the topic I have been commenting on is the claim that the Church is inerrant. Since neither Jesus nor the Gospels states this, I am simply asking what is the reasoning that leads you to this conclusion. All you keep saying, in essence, is that you believe it because it is taught you by the church. Well, that is fine for you. But it is not persuasive reasoning for all folks, particularly since not all folks are Catholic, and certainly not all folks are Christian. I KNOW that Catholics believe this. I am simply asking WHY. If it is ONLY because you are told so, then, fine, I will acknowledge that answer even though I think it is a very weak answer. I am just trying to get the answer. If there is a catechism on this issue, if someone would provide the number, I would look it up and read it.

 

[larkin31]

I don’t see your ‘logic’, Larkin.

Christ did not come here to pass out Bibles, and there are countless testimonies of the life of faith and God’s intervention that do not use ‘logic’…I don’t know what kind of logic you are proposing here.

Pentecost was not logical. The apostles were speaking in tongues…not using logic. They went out to spread the Good News, lay hands and heal, forgive sins through Christ, select bishops and successors who could fully absorb the totality of Christ’s message and admininstrate a church…

It is a matter of fidelity to the Oral Tradition of Christ, His apostles, and building the universal church to be our nourishment and guide in living the life of Christ. Just going back and forth with Bible quotes…the Sunday Mass takes 3 years to go through the entire Bible…we hear the Bible at every Mass. It is the best place to understand Scripture.

The Lord has invited us to the banquet table…to partake of the Eucharist, broken for our salvation and redemption to enable us each day to begin again renewed.

There is so much more to Christianity than simply looking at individualistic Bible passages that defy Christ’s Oral Tradition and the apostles…it is finding Jesus Christ alive in His…His Church. The Church provides us such a life in Christ–the Word of God, the sacraments, the communion of saints, the liturgical year, the great unity of universal faith that transcends races, cultures, and regions – that it is truly Christ’s kingdom on earth. Those Catholics who are in serious sin are not in the Church and not in His kingdom so you can’t condemn it because of those who cause scandal. Because then you are further rejecting what you do not know.

I don’t reject ANY religion because of the errors of its followers, or I would have to reject them ALL for this reason.

You misunderstand me. I do not hold it against any institution, religious or otherwise, that it makes mistakes. I DO hold it against people when they claim inerrancy in a blind or hypocritical or biased (self-righteous) way. It was never important to my faith that I consider the Bible or church teachings “infallible.” It was not important when I believed, nor had it anything to do with why I left. I am simply trying to understand how the claim can possibly be “true.”

 

[KathleenGee]

You ask why…You have read that Jesus said upon this rock, Pedra/Peter, formerly Simon,…Jesus renaming him a significant action in itself…that He would build His church.

You look at Acts and the work the Apostles did in selecting their successors…you look at ancient writings, comparing the successors and early church fathers vs the writings of very good teachers…who did not have the scope of the universality of faith with the presence of the Holy Spirit.

You then look at the construction of the faith in the church, diocese by diocese, meaning here the local church, and how the Church built upon itself, how small traditions and practices developed.

You look at beginning liturgies up to the time when St. Justin the Martyr was asked to document what happened at the Mass, this going back to the early 100’s.

You see how Christianity spread out where we have had the various regions’ rites, predominantly the Byzantine rite…you learn to see the primacy of Peter in Rome…while maintaining the character and charisms of the local churches and their autonomy…

You see documents and manuscripts, personal journals of past saints and martyrs who comprise the beginnings of the communion of saints and the Breaking of Bread.

You study ancient truths of the Oral Tradition of Jesus vs the heretical doctrines that arose even during the times of the apostles and St. Paul…note he also one whose name was changed by Christ …

It is the Holy Spirit that intertwines Scripture with Tradition–the oral Tradition of Jesus passed through the apostles to the successors…true teaching is that which includes the primacy of Rome with the union of all bishops, who in turn represent us, mutually identifiable through the working of the same Holy Spirit.

In the study of rites, presently there are about 22 in the Roman rite alone, you see how various parts of local churches broke away, may be some for several hundreds of years, and then return to the Latin rite, while those separate are called Orthodox…what is coming to mind here are the Roman Rite Ethiopian Catholics who returned vs the Orthodox Ethiopians who keep separate and in fact practice and retain a number of Jewish customs.

When you start to look at people who come to Jesus Christ within the universal church, you begin to see how truly diverse it is. If you are baptized, Larkin, you are already baptized into the Catholic Church as it as a rite comes from the Church. Thus we would consider you as separated brethren. The works of mercy are hardly any different from a Catholic church to a protestant one. But witnessing the Mass and the sacraments, the communion of saints, the catechesis, the formation of morality, the use of canon law, the whole work of liturgy, our social teaching, the lives of the saints, the promotion of education, the arts, hospital and healthcare, the work and service among the poor down through time, we are not too bad.

 

[larkin31]

You ask why…You have read that Jesus said upon this rock, Pedra/Peter, formerly Simon,…Jesus renaming him a significant action in itself…that He would build His church.

You look at Acts and the work the Apostles did in selecting their successors…you look at ancient writings, comparing the successors and early church fathers vs the writings of very good teachers…who did not have the scope of the universality of faith with the presence of the Holy Spirit.

You then look at the construction of the faith in the church, diocese by diocese, meaning here the local church, and how the Church built upon itself, how small traditions and practices developed.

You look at beginning liturgies up to the time when St. Justin the Martyr was asked to document what happened at the Mass, this going back to the early 100’s.

You see how Christianity spread out where we have had the various regions’ rites, predominantly the Byzantine rite…you learn to see the primacy of Peter in Rome…while maintaining the character and charisms of the local churches and their autonomy…

You see documents and manuscripts, personal journals of past saints and martyrs who comprise the beginnings of the communion of saints and the Breaking of Bread.

You study ancient truths of the Oral Tradition of Jesus vs the heretical doctrines that arose even during the times of the apostles and St. Paul…note he also one whose name was changed by Christ …

It is the Holy Spirit that intertwines Scripture with Tradition–the oral Tradition of Jesus passed through the apostles to the successors…true teaching is that which includes the primacy of Rome with the union of all bishops, who in turn represent us, mutually identifiable through the working of the same Holy Spirit.

In the study of rites, presently there are about 22 in the Roman rite alone, you see how various parts of local churches broke away, may be some for several hundreds of years, and then return to the Latin rite, while those separate are called Orthodox…what is coming to mind here are the Roman Rite Ethiopian Catholics who returned vs the Orthodox Ethiopians who keep separate and in fact practice and retain a number of Jewish customs.

When you start to look at people who come to Jesus Christ within the universal church, you begin to see how truly diverse it is. If you are baptized, Larkin, you are already baptized into the Catholic Church as it as a rite comes from the Church. Thus we would consider you as separated brethren. The works of mercy are hardly any different from a Catholic church to a protestant one. But witnessing the Mass and the sacraments, the communion of saints, the catechesis, the formation of morality, the use of canon law, the whole work of liturgy, our social teaching, the lives of the saints, the promotion of education, the arts, hospital and healthcare, the work and service among the poor down through time, we are not too bad.

Thanks, but none of this is on my topic or point.

 

[KathleenGee]

Error…in what context?

There are errors in the nature of Christ…the Councils address errors…the biggest problems come in administrating and integrating faith…but they are corrected either at the local level, bishops’ councils or universal church councils.

Following the Gospels, the apostles erred in understanding Christ. He corrected them…He left them with the Holy Spirit.

What you are asking then, is not about the Eucharist, but about the nature of the church.

Infallibility has to do with faith and morals…all derived from Christ and the sanctity of human life given us.

Again, perhaps, the catechism would be your best place to study and reflect…and most of all, pray to the Holy Spirit. Ask Him to guide you and give you grace.

 

[PRmerger]

Should I take this long response to mean that you, personally, don’t want to explain the logic either? As a statement of faith, I accept infallibility. As a claim from logic, we need to actually SEE the logic in order to judge it.

How peculiar that Larkin is appealing to logic here!

How logical is it that someone who claims that Scripture is full of errors to make statements about Jesus?

Such as what he “cared about” and what his core teachings are:

I don’t think that Jesus cared much about it at all. He refers to it a few times (more in later Gospels, which makes me suspicious), but the core of his teaching is about spiritual cleansing, spiritual healing, and spiritual humility and wisdom.

How in the world does someone claiming the Scriptures are in error make statements like the above? :whacky:

 

[PRmerger]

Since neither Jesus nor the Gospels states this…

Perhaps it was an error that the Scriptures didn’t say it?

 

[benedictus2]

Should I take this long response to mean that you, personally, don’t want to explain the logic either? As a statement of faith, I accept infallibility. As a claim from logic, we need to actually SEE the logic in order to judge it.

Hmmm, I think I did just that a few posts before.

Speaking to Larkin the protestant (provided we both hold the Bbile as inerrant) then infallibility is the only logical conclusion.

The illogical conclusion is fallibility.

But first you have to extricate yourself from that quandary you’ve got yourself into by saying that the Bible is inspired but not inerrant, because from a Biblical perspective, that is extremely illogical.

 

[rinnie]

Jesus healed on the Sabbath and he overturned tables at the temple. He also called the pharisees hypocrites. These actions contradicted the will and teachings of God’s appointed religious authorities of the day. Jesus was a rebel and not just looking for peace and understanding. He was purposefully being provocative and stirring up the pot.

I did not say that Jesus “contradicted scripture”. “Scripture” did not exist until after Jesus died. Which we all know.

Um Jesus was a Rebel and not a peacemaker? Pleassssssssse. Blessed are the peacemakers for those are the kingdom of God.

They were hypocrites, they did not practice what they preached. Unlike Jesus.

Why would Jesus not turn the tables in the temple. Was the Temple made for a market place? No Not according to the word of GOd. (which by the way is like the same word)

Jesus came here in Peace and was about nothing but peace and Love. A rebel is a fighter. Jesus did not come to fight he came in peace. If Jesus was a rebel when Peter cut off the ear of the soldier Jesus would not have put it back on.

I am so so sorry that you have such a weak understanding of God.

 

[rinnie]

KathleenGee, the topic I have been commenting on is the claim that the Church is inerrant. Since neither Jesus nor the Gospels states this, I am simply asking what is the reasoning that leads you to this conclusion. All you keep saying, in essence, is that you believe it because it is taught you by the church. Well, that is fine for you. But it is not persuasive reasoning for all folks, particularly since not all folks are Catholic, and certainly not all folks are Christian. I KNOW that Catholics believe this. I am simply asking WHY. If it is ONLY because you are told so, then, fine, I will acknowledge that answer even though I think it is a very weak answer. I am just trying to get the answer. If there is a catechism on this issue, if someone would provide the number, I would look it up and read it.

I would love to show it to you.

Saul Saul why are you persecuting me. Who are you? Jesus the one you are persecuting? I am sure you have heard that before. Who was Saul persecuting Larkin? The Church, the Church that Peter, and Saul and the Apostles were all a part of, The Catholic Church.

THe Gospels do state this. Jesus Christ is the Church. Jesus is the Word that became Flesh the Catholic Church led by the Power of the Holy Spirit. Kinda like case closed!

 

[KathleenGee]

Amen!!!

I think Protestants project a much more man-centered perception on Catholics than we actually do. We are following Jesus in His Word, nurtured on His sacraments, receiving guidance from those in lawful authority.

Let those who continue to deny and protest do what they want.

Faith in Christ and trust in the Holy Spirit working through the Church is walking in certitude and peace.

For us, each one of us is accountable to God every day in our work. We don’t have our priests or anyone else holding our hands…we are free and unbonded.

 

[benedictus2]

You have provided no argument at all yet, so it is neither logical nor illogical. You need to provide a series of claims, based on logical reasoning, in order to assert that you are actually being “logical.” Once you write out s series of statements and assert what reasoning you are using, then I will tell you how logical I think it is.

Maybe some haven’t but I have.

And when pressed to explain your position that the bible is inspired but not inerrant, all you could muster was “who’s we”.

So please, since from this post it seems you value highly logical posts, then I am awaiting one such rebuttal from you.

 

[PRmerger]

And when pressed to explain your position that the bible is inspired but not inerrant, all you could muster was “who’s we”.

So please, since from this post it seems you value highly logical posts, then I am awaiting one such rebuttal from you.

Yes. And it would be interesting to know if Larkin believes the Bible is “inspired” in the same way that Charles Dickens was “inspired”? Are we to treat them similarly?

And, inspired by whom?

 

[Cinette]

*Of course Larkin continues to play games!!

I said that when Jesus established His Church he had to protect it from error. It makes sense, it is logical.

Jesus said the Holy Spirit would guide His Church into all Truth. Of course!

The Pope and the Magisterium oversee a very large Church throughout the world and needs structure. Logical!

There is Canon Law, Doctrine, Bishops, Priests, Deacons, the Catechism and the priesthood of the laity to teach and to keep the faithful in check. Logical! (any large establishment needs structure and guidelines and procedure manuals)

People get caught up in the secular world and often buy into the relativism concept and new age etc and they have to be corrected and guided. Logical!

While all can sin and do, the Church is protected and preserved by the Holy Spirit. Someone further back told of a person who was studying Church history and was surprised to note that the teachings way back (old Catechism) was the same as the new Catechism (though I am sure the new Catechism might have expanded a little)

All this makes sense!! If the Church is not protected and preserved then Jesus has broken his promise - would he do that?? No of course not.

I have explained it very simply and I believe it is completely logical. Makes perfect sense.

How can anyone claim that all Churches are guided by the Spirit? Not logical!

I believe the Spirit acts in all peoples - even non Christians. But when it comes to His Church that is something else.

What is illogical about that Larkin?

Blessings
Cinette

 

[larkin31]

Maybe some haven’t but I have.

And when pressed to explain your position that the bible is inspired but not inerrant, all you could muster was “who’s we”.

Did you not read the next two lines of what I wrote?

Are you a liar?

 

[larkin31]

Of course Larkin continues to play games!!

No, I don’t.

I said that when Jesus established His Church he had to protect it from error. It makes sense, it is logical.

He “had” to? WHY? You keep claiming this, but you don’t explain it. It’s not logical until you explain your reasoning.

Jesus said the Holy Spirit would guide His Church into all Truth.

If I tell you that I will lead you to all the baseball stadiums in America, that does not logically mean that we will never get lost, nor even that I will not mistake a football stadium for a baseball stadium. It only means, that in the end, we will make it to all the stadiums. Being led to “all truth” is no different, nor would, say, being led to “all happiness” or “all love.” These do not mean that there is NEVER any unhappiness or hate, but that, in the end, happiness and love will be achieved. It is a statement of reliability and trust, but not of inerrancy along the way. I know that you believe it to be otherwise, but it is not logically so.