Protestants, why are you not Catholic?

[classical_hero]

Luke

And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favor with God.

Why can’t I ask Mary who is highly favored by God and blessed among all women and Mother of Lord to help me find Her Son which She did and like She did?

Didn’t Marys prayer to the Lord intercede for all of us? Why would that not occur any more?

The Lord is still with Her? She still highly favored or no? If She’s highly favored by God why shouldn’t She be highly favored with all of us? Isn’t that why all generations will call her Blessed?

Mary is highly favoured since God chose her for a role that is reserved for one woman alone, but she is still just like every other women, just that God chose her to carry the Son of God on earth. She is “blessed among all women”, not above all women. Mary’s prayer was her own prayer since she had a very special task to complete, but she can’t intercede, since only God can do that.

 

[PRmerger]

Mary’s prayer was her own prayer since she had a very special task to complete, but she can’t intercede, since only God can do that.

If only God can intercede, then why do you ask others to pray for you? Do you not have prayer chains at your church to pray for someone, for example, who’s going to have surgery?

 

[Jon_S_1]

Mary is highly favoured since God chose her for a role that is reserved for one woman alone, but she is still just like every other women, just that God chose her to carry the Son of God on earth. She is “blessed among all women”, not above all women. Mary’s prayer was her own prayer since she had a very special task to complete, but she can’t intercede, since only God can do that.

Do you not ask others to pray for you?

Perhaps your friend or pastor? If they pray for you are they not interceding to God on your behalf?

Catholics believe in the FULL Body of Christ.

The Body of Christ is made up of all Christians who are alive as well as those who are in Gods direct presence in heaven.

If your pastor can pray for you, why can a Christian in heaven in Gods presence in glorified states not pray for you ?

Revelation 5:8 clearly shows them doing so. This is the part where John sees heaven in real time.

“8 And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of God’s people.”

How interesting that incense is used to, just as the Catholic Church today uses incense to symbolize prayers going up to God.

 

[adrift]

This is the complete version of his 3 writings, “The Instructor”. As you will see on page 347, he DOES in fact say it is figurative. Further, if you read his writings in their entirety, you would see that he writes OFTEN of Jesus’ figurative speech throughout the entire work of “The Instructor”.

documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0150-0207,_Clemens_Alexandrinus,Paedagogus[Schaff],_EN.pdf

[,_EN.pdf"]Document]("http://documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0150-0207,_Clemens_Alexandrinus,Paedagogus[Schaff)

I think your problem is that it is not a WWW address.

I do not have the time yet to read this document. It looks like a difficult read.

He wasn’t saying it was both. He was taking it one step further to explain in a way to be understood better. Clement did this because he was writing to believers. Jesus didn’t do this because he knew those disciples who left him were not with him from the beginning.

What do you think is meant by?

But you are not inclined to understand it thus, but perchance more generally.

 

[Jon_S_1]

[,_EN.pdf"]Document]("http://documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0150-0207,_Clemens_Alexandrinus,Paedagogus[Schaff)

I think your problem is that it is not a WWW address.

I do not have the time yet to read this document. It looks like a difficult read.

What do you think is meant by?

Great Question.

The lead in to his quote makes it clear that the real presence is true, but hard to understand, so at least accept the symbolic value of the communion meal. A “more general” understanding, but far from a complete or detailed example.

 

[stewstew03]

 

[Nicea325]

Mary is highly favoured since God chose her for a role that is reserved for one woman alone, but she is still just like every other women, just that God chose her to carry the Son of God on earth. She is “blessed among all women”, not above all women. Mary’s prayer was her own prayer since she had a very special task to complete, but she can’t intercede, since only God can do that.

:ehh: How can you say she was highly favored and yet she just like every other women? If she was like “every” other women who has ever lived, then I seriously doubt God would have chosen just “another” women to conceive His begotten Son.

Obviously she was above all other women. It is amazing how Protestants bring Mary down to just “another” women? HELLO! She is the very special women who gave birth to the Savior of humanity!

 

[MJCamp]

Are you suggesting this is the first time the doctrine appeared???

There are literally thousands of pieces of evidence prior to Trent.

Here are some of the earliest (besides the Bible) from Ignatius of Antioch

“Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.”

“Letter to the Smyrnaeans”, paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.

“Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ.”

-“Letter to the Ephesians”, paragraph 20, c. 80-110 A.D.

“I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed.”

-“Letter to the Romans”, paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D.

“Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons.”

-Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.

Clear evidence here what the early Christians were practicing

1 Cor:23-27

23For the tradition I received from theLordand also handed on to you is that on the night he was betrayed, theLordJesustook some bread,24and after he had given thanks, he broke it, and he said, 'This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.'25And in the same way, with the cup after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood. “Whenever you drink it, do this as a memorial of me.'26Whenever you eat this bread, then, and drink this cup, you are proclaiming the Lord’s death until he comes.27Therefore anyone who eats the bread or drinks the cup of theLordunworthily is answerable for the body and blood of the Lord.28Everyone is to examine himself and only then eat of the bread or drink from the cup;29because apersonwho eats and drinks without recognising the body is eating and drinking his own condemnation.”

Condemning words from Paul if the Eucharist were just a symbolic meal and practice

 

[Kliska]

1 Cor:23-27

23For the tradition I received from theLordand also handed on to you is that on the night he was betrayed, theLordJesustook some bread,24and after he had given thanks, he broke it, and he said, 'This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.'25And in the same way, with the cup after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood. “Whenever you drink it, do this as a memorial of me.'26Whenever you eat this bread, then, and drink this cup, you are proclaiming the Lord’s death until he comes.27Therefore anyone who eats the bread or drinks the cup of theLordunworthily is answerable for the body and blood of the Lord.28Everyone is to examine himself and only then eat of the bread or drink from the cup;29because apersonwho eats and drinks without recognising the body is eating and drinking his own condemnation.”

Condemning words from Paul if the Eucharist were just a symbolic meal and practice

A full meal was present. Some were showing up, separating themselves and eating and drinking all the food before others showed up. This was supposed to be feast of love and togetherness coming together as One Body. By the people breaking up into groups, they were missing the point of the meal and some were even getting drunk.

Paul teaches that we are to partake worthily (that is an adverb) not worthy (that is an adjective). In short we are to partake worthily, this is in manner that is worthy. Some were so hungry, distracted, fractured, and drunk that they didn’t even perceive the elements of bread and wine. When it says “a person who eats and drinks without recognizing the body” notice that it doesn’t say “without recognizing the body and blood.” In short, their sin in this sentence was that they were not recognizing the Body of Christ; the people gathered.

 

[Jon_S_1]

A full meal was present. Some were showing up, separating themselves and eating and drinking all the food before others showed up. This was supposed to be feast of love and togetherness coming together as One Body. By the people breaking up into groups, they were missing the point of the meal and some were even getting drunk.

Paul teaches that we are to partake worthily (that is an adverb) not worthy (that is an adjective). In short we are to partake worthily, this is in manner that is worthy. Some were so hungry, distracted, fractured, and drunk that they didn’t even perceive the elements of bread and wine. When it says “a person who eats and drinks without recognizing the body” notice that it doesn’t say “without recognizing the body and blood.” In short, their sin in this sentence was that they were not recognizing the Body of Christ; the people gathered.

Wow…

Please show me your evidence for this. Sounds like you are making up your own history or at least jumping to conclusions based on virtually nothing.

It’s your opinion that Christians were all drunks and could not even tell they were eating bread.

Wow just wow.

The Fundamentalist insanity continues. Prove your man made tradition at any cost right?

 

[batman1973]

Wow…

Please show me your evidence for this. Sounds like you are making up your own history or at least jumping to conclusions based on virtually nothing.

It’s your opinion that Christians were all drunks and could not even tell they were eating bread.

Wow just wow.

The Fundamentalist insanity continues. Prove your man made tradition at any cost right?

You sound like your describing Roman Catholicism…

 

[Kliska]

Wow…

Please show me your evidence for this. Sounds like you are making up your own history or at least jumping to conclusions based on virtually nothing.

It’s your opinion that Christians were all drunks and could not even tell they were eating bread.

Wow just wow.

The Fundamentalist insanity continues. Prove your man made tradition at any cost right?

I would suggest studying the scripture before jumping on me with both feet.

1 Corinthians 11:17 But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you, because you come together not for the better but for the worse. 18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and in part I believe it. 19 For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident [among you. **20 Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper, 21 for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and drink? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? In this I will not praise you.

23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep.

 

[Jon_S_1]

I would suggest studying the scripture before jumping on me with both feet.

1 Corinthians 11:17 But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you, because you come together not for the better but for the worse. 18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and in part I believe it. 19 For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident [among you. **20 Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper, 21 for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and drink? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? In this I will not praise you.

23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep.

Yes,

I understand that there were issues. I understand this was corrected by Paul.

Where on earth did you get that EVERYONE. Was so drunk they could not tell they were eating bread and had to be told they were eating bread.

That’s pretty absurd.

It also brings up the question of why this bread and wine, Pure symbols, have anything to do with judgement and salvation.

I also wonder how it is if someone eats bread while drunk, is guilty of the body and blood of The Lord.

 

[Jon_S_1]

You sound like your describing Roman Catholicism…

I like to phrase things that way because it is a general attack on Catholics that we have man made traditions.

In fact only Catholics and Orthodox can claim our traditions originate in Christ and the Apostles because only we have the historical pedigree to do so.

It is the entirety of Protestantism that rests on man made traditions. Whether it be Luther, Cslvin, Zuigli, Wesley, Hrnry VIII, or Marc Driscoll or Joel Olsteen. They are all founded on men and their traditions.

 

[Abigail94]

Like some others on here, my response is on an emotional level. The Catholic church just feels right- warm, comforting, like home. Protestant churches are barren (as someone else said). But then that is a personal reaction, I guess it must be the opposite for others. At the same time, Catholic churches (some of them) can be a bit scary, mysterious. Personally, I like that. My heart contracts when I enter a Catholic church but not a protestant one, however beautiful. For others it may seem foreboding. Also, the vast majority do not change the religion they were born into, especially in more traditional societies. For some of us its all a matter of taste. I don’t like to argue on theological grounds as a lot of it is a matter of faith. Interesting question and discussion.

Abigail

 

[stewstew03]

A full meal was present.
…

Right. And Paul was saying that the Eucharist – without Christ – is just a common meal.

 

[SoMissCatholic]

I would suggest studying the scripture before jumping on me with both feet.

1 Corinthians 11:17 But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you, because you come together not for the better but for the worse. 18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and in part I believe it. 19 For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident [among you. **20 Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper, 21 for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and drink? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? In this I will not praise you.

23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep.

27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep.

That is pretty strong language for something that is only symbolic. Are you suggesting that Paul was saying that many were sick and weak and a number of them died because of something that was only symbolic?

 

[Kliska]

Where on earth did you get that EVERYONE. Was so drunk they could not tell they were eating bread and had to be told they were eating bread.

That’s pretty absurd.

This is indeed absurd, good thing that is not anywhere close to what I said.

Kliska:

they were missing the point of the meal and some were even getting drunk.

Is the church the body of Christ or not? Let me answer for both of us; yes, the church is the body of Christ. Read the passage again. Paul was mad because of the **divisions **taking place when it was supposed to be a gathering of the Body. They were splitting the body of Christ and their manner of partaking was reprehensible. Note that they are eating and drinking damnation onto themselves **because they were not discerning the body; that is they were not discerning the Body of Christ; the church.
**
This is not even interpretation, it’s just reading what Paul actually said.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

PR, EXACTLY. TALKING to someone is not prayer/worship. Prayer is. All worship is due God. That is why Protestant do not pray to spirits.

That right there is a big part of the problem.
The English language evolves.

And protestantism, especially evangelical protestantism, is a newly created belief system without history.

When Catholics use the word “pray” or “prayer” we have a word with roots going back as far as the language goes, and it meant something different than it does to modern protestants. It can, and does, mean “earnest request” (i.e., NOT worship) among other things.

 

[stewstew03]

Is the church the body of Christ or not? Let me answer for both of us; yes, the church is the body of Christ. Read the passage again. Paul was mad because of the **divisions **taking place when it was supposed to be a gathering of the Body. They were splitting the body of Christ and their manner of partaking was reprehensible. Note that they are eating and drinking damnation onto themselves **because they were not discerning the body; that is they were not discerning the Body of Christ; the church.
**
This is not even interpretation, it’s just reading what Paul actually said.

Right - I’m glad you agree with Paul (and the early Christians) that Christ is present in the Eucharist, and that partaking in the Eucharist is essential to the body of Christ!