Im no longer going to be a Catholic

[qui_est_ce]

I’ve never heard someone invoke pagan gods to justify the Eucharist before. Interesting. So… you believe there is more than one god, or you believe that God likes people to emulate those that follow false gods?

Your logic defies me.
:ehh:

You know, I used to be Catholic, and I actually do understand the meaning behind the Eucharist, but that is just the most bizarre thing I have ever read.

Well obviously you didn’t understand the meaning behind the Eucharist or you’d still be Catholic.

Jesus was the pascal lamb offered for the freedom of the Isrealites. The first born without blemish. The lamb was roasted and eaten. The blood of the lamb was sprinkled on the lintels with a hyssop reed.

In the Last Supper, Jesus and his desciples were obeserving Passover. Jesus took the bread, and said “this is my body” and gave it to his discples to eat it. He took the cup of wine, and said “this is my blood” and gave it to them to drink.

Then he told his disciples to “Do this in memory of me.” And that is exactly what we Catholics do at mass.

He said he would not drink of the fruit of the vine until he was in his father’s kingdom. On the cross, he said “I thirst” they gave him wind on a hyssop reed. Jesus drank it, and said “It is finished.” The kingdom of God is now on earth.

Do you see how the first passover prefigures the Eucharist? How many times in the new testament is Christ referred to as the lamb?

 

[Sideline]

Well obviously you didn’t understand the meaning behind the Eucharist or you’d still be Catholic.

Well, that’s a useful comment. Believe what you like.

Jesus was the pascal lamb offered for the freedom of the Isrealites. The first born without blemish. The lamb was roasted and eaten. The blood of the lamb was sprinkled on the lintels with a hyssop reed.

What part of. “I was a Catholic and understand the Eucharist,” didn’t you understand?

In the Last Supper, Jesus and his desciples were obeserving Passover… etc.

Oh…I missed that part. I only attended around 2,000 masses. You’d think I would have figured out what the Eucharist meant during the two years that taught CCD, but I am rather slow.

Do you always go around telling people what they have already said that they know, or is it a special favour to me?

 

[estesbob]

What part of. “I was a Catholic and understand the Eucharist,” didn’t you understand?

?

If you understood the Eucharist you would never have left.

 

[Namesake]

If you understood the Eucharist you would never have left.

That’s an obtuse argument so often made by Catholics when they have no way to refute logically. Basically saying that if you disagree with Catholicism you don’t understand. It’s the “no true Scotsman” fallacy.

 

[Sideline]

If you understood the Eucharist you would never have left.

What part of. “I was a Catholic and understand the Eucharist,” didn’t you understand?

Why are we repeating ourselves?

 

[jmcrae]

What part of. “I was a Catholic and understand the Eucharist,” didn’t you understand?

Why are we repeating ourselves?

If you understood that the Eucharist is the closest you will ever get to Jesus in this lifetime (and assuming you love Jesus) it is difficult to imagine giving it up for anything that is of this world.

 

[estesbob]

That’s an obtuse argument so often made by Catholics when they have no way to refute logically. Basically saying that if you disagree with Catholicism you don’t understand. It’s the “no true Scotsman” fallacy.

If you understood the Eucharist was the physical body and blood of Christ there is no way you would turn your back on it. .

 

[Sideline]

If you understood that the Eucharist is the closest you will ever get to Jesus in this lifetime (and assuming you love Jesus) it is difficult to imagine giving it up for anything that is of this world.

Ah, that makes sense now.

I don’t believe in God. I don’t believe that Jesus is God, or the Son of God, or the Lamb, or really anything but a man with differing beliefs than my own.

 

[Namesake]

If you understood the Eucharist was the physical body and blood of Christ there is no way you would turn your back on it. .

But I do understand that. I don’t believe it’s true. In fact I am as sure it’s not true as you are sure it is true.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I will credit the RCC with some degree of openness regarding the Shroud of Turin investigation. And the current pope is at least open to the idea of common descent. But there are so many examples going the other way too. It took the RCC a very long time to finally admit their error regarding Galileo.

What about Martin Luther? Have the Lutherans ever apologized their error about Galileo?

What about all the Catholic univsersities in the world? Are they close minded?

Galileo never spent a day in prision. During his trial he was spent 22 days apartment of an official of the Inquisition. After his trial, his confinement was spentin the houses of friends, comfortable and usually luxurious. He was neither tortured nor blinded by his persecutors. In 1637, five years before his death, he became totally blind. He buried in within the church of Santa Croce at Florence (Consecrated ground) and pope Urban VIIIs ent his special blessing to the Galileo before he died.

Google Rober Bellarmine:

Cardinal Bellarmine, a member of the Sacred College, wrote "One should not categorically assert what seemed to contradict the Bible."I say that if a real proof be found that the sun is fixed and does not revolve round the earth, but the earth round the sun, then it will be necessary, very carefully, to proceed to the explanation of the passages of Scripture which appear to be contrary, and we should rather say that we have misunderstood these than pronounce that to be false which is demonstrated."

The real controversy was that Galileo’s theory seemed to contradict Scripture. Galileo subesquently redefined popular understanding of the verses without the Authority of the Church. The Church itself had not interpreted that particular verse as infallible. After much study, Church evenentually agreed with Galileo’s theory did no contradict Scripture.

 

[Namesake]

What about Martin Luther? Have the Lutherans ever apologized their error about Galileo?

What about all the Catholic univsersities in the world? Are they close minded?

Galileo never spent a day in prision. During his trial he was spent 22 days apartment of an official of the Inquisition. After his trial, his confinement was spentin the houses of friends, comfortable and usually luxurious. He was neither tortured nor blinded by his persecutors. In 1637, five years before his death, he became totally blind. He buried in within the church of Santa Croce at Florence (Consecrated ground) and pope Urban VIIIs ent his special blessing to the Galileo before he died.

Google Rober Bellarmine:

Cardinal Bellarmine, a member of the Sacred College, wrote "One should not categorically assert what seemed to contradict the Bible.“I say that if a real proof be found that the sun is fixed and does not revolve round the earth, but the earth round the sun, then it will be necessary, very carefully, to proceed to the explanation of the passages of Scripture which appear to be contrary, and we should rather say that we have misunderstood these than pronounce that to be false which is demonstrated.”

The real controversy was that Galileo’s theory seemed to contradict Scripture. Galileo subesquently redefined popular understanding of the verses without the Authority of the Church. The Church itself had not interpreted that particular verse as infallible. After much study, Church evenentually agreed with Galileo’s theory did no contradict Scripture.

You present a very Catholic point of view which I dispute. I have had this argument with many Catholics and with the same outcome always. Lets us just disagree, OK?

 

[estesbob]

Ah, that makes sense now.

I don’t believe in God. I don’t believe that Jesus is God, or the Son of God, or the Lamb, or really anything but a man with differing beliefs than my own.

Then your statement that you understood the Eucharist was not correct.

 

[qui_est_ce]

But I do understand that. I don’t believe it’s true. In fact I am as sure it’s not true as you are sure it is true.

So you are an athiest. You don’t believe in God and the Bible. If you had said that from the beginning…

 

[Namesake]

Then your statement that you understood the Eucharist was not correct.

Oh, I quite understand the Catholic concept of the Eucharist. Oh yes indeed I certainly do in some matter of minuscule detail even perhaps more than you might. I do not for one nanosecond believe one bit of it. It is not true at all. If you want to believe it that’s fine, but my lack of belief is not because of a failure to understand. My lack of belief is because I simply do not believe it at all regardless of how much you do believe it. I don’t believe in fairies either, even though I have a certain understanding of fairies. Neat stories, but nothing I am willing to base my life on.

 

[mercygate]

So it isn’t enough for you that I assert that I have read most all of the pertinent literature even if I assert that my college studies included most of the relevant literature (including graduate work)? You still want a complete bibliography? That would take some time as the book case is quite large.

Would you be willing to match me? I don’t think it’s necessary.

How about…

Marx, Freud, Huxley, Orwell, Rushdie, Joyce, Anscombe, Belloc , Chesterton, Lewis, Dawson, Moore, Pope, Tolkien, Wilde…

Want more?

Just a note signifying little, I studied mediaeval philosophy under Elizabeth Anscombe’s husband, Peter Geach, when Anscombe was a visiting Professor at Michigan – that was the year the Ark ran aground on Mount Ararat. Good memories. Gallons of sherry. At the time I had no idea they were Catholic.

 

[qui_est_ce]

You present a very Catholic point of view which I dispute. I have had this argument with many Catholics and with the same outcome always. Lets us just disagree, OK?

Consdering the conflict was with the Catholic Church, and she was the keeper of the records, with which she clearly admits her error, I challenge you to find documents from the period which differ from the CC POV. You have to admit it was not a Big Bad CC who bullied, beat, tortured, and blinded poor Galileo, who was just a poor little scientist trying to seek the truth, and then left him to die chained to a dungeon floor.

You also have to admit that the CC has always been a patron of the arts and sciences, when she was finally freed from the persecutions.

 

[Namesake]

So you are an athiest. You don’t believe in God and the Bible. If you had said that from the beginning…

I am closer to that, yes. Having been raised in a very religious family I have great difficulty giving up on religion. But I am coming closer. I haven’t taken down my beautiful crucifix above my desk, but I’ve considered doing so. I cannot go that far yet, and maybe never, I don’t know yet. It’s a journey, as you I am sure understand.

 

[estesbob]

Oh, I quite understand the Catholic concept of the Eucharist. Oh yes indeed I certainly do in some matter of minuscule detail even perhaps more than you might. I do not for one nanosecond believe one bit of it. It is not true at all. If you want to believe it that’s fine, but my lack of belief is not because of a failure to understand. My lack of belief is because I simply do not believe it at all regardless of how much you do believe it. I don’t believe in fairies either, even though I have a certain understanding of fairies. Neat stories, but nothing I am willing to base my life on.

There is a huge difference between saying you understand the Eucharist and saying you understand the concept of the Eucharist. You appear to be your normal garden-variety atheist. Could have saved us all a lot of time if you had just said so in the first place.

 

[Namesake]

You also have to admit that the CC has always been a patron of the arts and sciences, when she was finally freed from the persecutions.

I have to admit no such thing. The Catholic Church only supported what was in their best interest, not what was true in a secular sense such as science. The RCC was dragged into the Enlightenment. In fact, the Enlightenment was essentially a rebellion against the RCC that fortunately resulted in freeing the minds of people oppressed by the RCC in Europe for hundreds of years. The RCC lost a lot of control because of the Enlightenment.

I do not have to admit that the RCC was a patron of science at all.

 

[Namesake]

There is a huge difference between saying you understand the Eucharist and saying you understand the concept of the Eucharist. You appear to be your normal garden-variety atheist. Could have saved us all a lot of time if you had just said so in the first place.

I would say so now if it were true, which it is not.

So according to you no rational person in command of the facts of Catholicism could possibly reject Catholicism?