Stay Catholic or change religions?

[Tantum_ergo]

This kinda sounds like Bill Clinton saying it depends on what the definition of the word is, is, after having sexual relations.

not at all. You do agree that God is present in all three cases, right?

But is He ‘more present’ (He is present in all three) in one or more? If so, how and why?

 

[Lapey]

Depends on the authority Lapey. Men who also sin and by whose fruit we shall know them. Or God and His Holy Spirit deep within our consciences. But regardless I have no idea why some of you keep insisting on comparing God to something related to the US secular system. But that’s up to you if you want to put the realm of God and the matters of faith on the same plane. More power to you I guess. Peace and God bless.

It is quite simple; this is a method of demonstrating absurdity by being absurd. Glad you recognized the absurdity, that’s exactly what I intended.

Oh, and if you want to measure the fruit to “know” them as you put it, what was the fruit of the disobedience of Judas Iscariot? He didn’t discern the body and blood too well for himself either, wouldn’t you agree?

 

[mskejj]

]You worship prophet Jesus, but Muslims never claim to worship prophet Muhammad. We worship God Almighty, the One True God.

Quran 112
In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
[1] Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
[2] Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
[3] He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
[4] And there is none like unto Him.

I always have a hard time understanding why Muslims refer to Jesus as a prophet. He certainly did not say he was a prophet…he said many times that he was the Son of God. By logical standards that would mean that he was God. If you do not believe that he was God then he must be 1. A liar or 2. Crazy…but why would you call him a prophet if that was the case? He has to be one of the three.

 

[qui_est_ce]

No Christine. Here is what you asked in the post I responded to.
qui est ce:

"I just want to know if CMatt believes in the Real Presence. That’s all I want to know.

So I answered yes. And that’s all you wanted to know. Or so you said.

Matt-
I am not playing little games. If you will read my posts, you will see I take the Eucharist very seriously. You say you are Catholic. You say you know what the Church teaches. I asked you in several posts if you believed in the Real Presence, not the real presence. I asked you if you believed that Jesus’ flesh and blood were truly present in the Eucharist. I asked you several times. I appealed to your knowledge of Church Teaching, and you twisted my question to mean something completely different than the Teaching I was asking you about.

jmcrae, thanx but I know what the CC says God does in HC.

Of course. I’m not that so ill-informed not to know what is said.

I think CMatt already know pretty much what the Church teaches.

I just want to know where he stands on the flesh and blood of our Lord in the Eucharist. In his own opinion.

Do you believe God the Eucharist is the literal body and blood of our Lord? Yes or no?

You did not answer the question. Is the host his literal body and the cup his literal blood. Is he literally present in the Eucharist or is he spiritually present as in he is with me know at the computer.

I want to know what YOU believe, not what some church or theologian believes.

Thanks.

Your little 's and cutesy dodges belie your willingness to engage in serious conversation. You are the one who is playing games.

This is me:

I’m tired of answering the same question to you, -]Christine/-] Matt.

 

[CMatt25]

These bits of information we share with you are not our opinions they are parts of our faith…

As someone mentioned earlier, said only a mere 7.5 decades after the crucifixion, “as you find the bishops, there you will find the Catholic Church.” St Ignatius, 107 AD. They are our current day apostles, whether we acknowledge them or not, this is truth. To be in disagreement with the bishops is in disagreement with Christ.

I am sorry you will not allow yourself to explore the truth found in your faith; not only Cmatt but all the others who question the Church in which they claim to belong, especially the OP.

I pray for you and all who are where I was a few short years ago to come to the light and seek His truth, you are home, just come on in! I also ask for your prayers to the Lord to keep me on track with His truth.

Lapey well you got the part about it’s not your opinions but your faith, right!

Nearly 8 decades is a lifetime for some.

Thanks for your prayers. We all need them. So you bet I will keep you in mine as well! God bless!

 

[CMatt25]

It is quite simple; this is a method of demonstrating absurdity by being absurd. Glad you recognized the absurdity, that’s exactly what I intended.

Oh, and if you want to measure the fruit to “know” them as you put it, what was the fruit of the disobedience of Judas Iscariot? He didn’t discern the body and blood too well for himself either, wouldn’t you agree?

Lapey it is not how **I **put it.

Matt 7:16, 20 “By their fruits you shall know them” 20Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)

But perhaps those words are confusing or not understandable to some either.

Well if Judas didn’t discern Christ Lord and Savior and didn’t discern the sacrifice He was about to make, then that has nothing to with me. So I certainly trust you were not comparing me to Judas Iscariot. But nevertheless, peace to you Lapey.

 

[qui_est_ce]

This happens because you are so uncommitted. Is Jesus present at the Eucharist or is He truly and really present in the Eucharistic species of bread and wine.

Is the Eucharistic bread Jesus after the priest says the words of consecration?

When I come before the Eucharist in adoration, am I looking into the face of Jesus Himself? Or am I simply looking at some supernatural bread as manna was to our fathers in the dessert?

You remind me of a guy who had us contemplate what the meaning of the word “is” is.
{snip}

We all have given you everything the Church offers you, but you reject everything that can lead you to truth, because somehow it is tainted. I am saddened by this, by your hardness of heart.

These bits of information we share with you are not our opinions they are parts of our faith, they are truths as the Church has taught since the crucifixion and resurrection of our Lord.

A convicted Catholic Christian does not mince words; he speaks with authority, the authority given the Church by Christ. As long as he preaches the truth according to the Church he has the Spirit of God behind him. If he speaks against the Church and it’s teachings he speaks against the Spirit of God.

It’s that simple. Sooner or later one must come to the realization that he doesn’t have the answers and has to truth those in authority, the Church’s leaders; the Bishops in communion with the Holy Father.

As someone mentioned earlier, said only a mere 7.5 decades after the crucifixion, “as you find the bishops, there you will find the Catholic Church.” St Ignatius, 107 AD. They are our current day apostles, whether we acknowledge them or not, this is truth. To be in disagreement with the bishops is in disagreement with Christ.

I am sorry you will not allow yourself to explore the truth found in your faith; not only Cmatt but all the others who question the Church in which they claim to belong, especially the OP.

Great post. It’s hard to stomach the casual attitude towards something so sacred.

 

[CMatt25]

Great post. It’s hard to stomach the casual attitude towards something so sacred.

Christine, then your stomach would really have a hard time seeing me receive our Lord and Savior in shorts and sneakers. They’re in good shape and nice and clean and white though. So I’m confident He doesn’t mind. He and his early followers were afterall partial to sandals I’m sure you know.

Oh and I stand upright with my hands cupped to receive Him in His real presence btw. That’s still allowed by my bishop. Peace.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Christine, then your stomach would really have a hard time seeing me receive our Lord and Savior in shorts and sneakers. They’re in good shape and nice and clean and white though. So I’m confident He doesn’t mind. He and his early followers were afterall partial to sandals I’m sure you know.

I’m going by what you say here, not how you look on the outside. I wore jeans and flip flops this morning.

11
But when the king came in to meet the guests he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment.
12
He said to him, ‘My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?’ But he was reduced to silence.
13
Then the king said to his attendants, ‘Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.’
14
Many are invited, but few are chosen."

It’s what’s in your attitude that matters.

 

[CMatt25]

I’m going by what you say here, not how you look on the outside. I wore jeans and flip flops this morning.
It’s what’s in your attitude that matters.

Christine, that’s great! And it didn’t matter to Him that you received Him that way, did it! Good thing this isn’t the traditional forum though or I’m certain, knowing from experience, that someone would be bashing you on CAF :sad_yes: right now as we speak for the attire you wore in His Real Presence. Sad but that’s the attitude some take. Oh well. (Oops sorry. I forgot you don’t like that smiley. But look I put “caps” this time for ya!) Peace to you Christine and have a safe and most blessed weekend.

 

[jimpres]

Christine, that’s great! And it didn’t matter to Him that you received Him that way, did it! Good thing this isn’t the traditional forum though or I’m certain, knowing from experience, that someone would be bashing you on CAF :sad_yes: right now as we speak for the attire you wore in His Real Presence. Sad but that’s the attitude some take. Oh well. (Oops sorry. I forgot you don’t like that smiley. But look I put “caps” this time for ya!) Peace to you Christine and have a safe and most blessed weekend.

I live in the South and many wear flip flops, shorts and a tank top even the women.

 

[CatholicFireman]

You worship prophet Jesus, but Muslims never claim to worship prophet Muhammad. We worship God Almighty, the One True God.

Quran 112
In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
[1] Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
[2] Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
[3] He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
[4] And there is none like unto Him.

Um…no.

Jesus is our LORD AND SAVIOR. Not a prophet.

“And Peter answering said, The Christ of God”

Luke 9:18-22

 

[jmcrae]

You do realize that was about 8 decades after Jesus resurrected I’m sure.

There were still quite a lot of people who had personally known the Apostles running around.

 

[CMatt25]

There were still quite a lot of people who had personally known the Apostles running around.

Well perhaps but how were their memories. And perhaps more importantly did they understand what the Apostles were saying and what they meant by their words.

 

[jmcrae]

Guan, ok I know you can’t speak for Jmcrae. But I’m sorry then for assuming you would not believe for instance, that The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop of TEC in the US, is in apostolic succession. I just assumed you believed she was not.

She isn’t. Not only because she is a woman, and thus, not made of the Sacramental stuff that is necessary for priests and Bishops (just as gluten-free bread is not made of the Sacramental stuff that is required for the Eucharist, even though it looks very similar to Eucharistic bread), but because in the year 1549 King Edward the Sixth, in his role as head of the Anglican Church, severed all ties to the Catholic Church and removed from every ritual of the Anglican Church, including its ordination ceremonies, all language that would connect it in any way to the Catholic Church.

The language has been restored since then, but one cannot un-break a broken line.

 

[guanophore]

Sure anyone can trace history when the "history" is written and then interpreted by the same one tracing it.  Just because the CC interprets itself and the ECFs in this or that way may or may not mean they have interpreted every what you believe is "fact" exactly correctly.

Definitely. The difference here is that many different people, over the course of many centuries, studied, while others interpreted, and others traced. Through it all, we find the history attests that the Catholic Church was founded by Christ.

No Christine. Here is what you asked in the post I responded to.

Originally Posted by qui est ce
“I just want to know if CMatt believes in the Real Presence. That’s all I want to know.”

So I answered yes. And that’s all you wanted to know. Or so you said.

Then you asked why?

So I gave you 4 Biblical verses trusting you and (name removed by moderator) and any other who get confused and don’t know what I mean by my words, and in the case of at least one of you doesn’t think even I know what I mean by my own words, would at least understand the word of God where He tells us He is really present with us, in our midst and will not abandon us.

But apparently you still misunderstand so I am done playing your little game where all you want to know is one thing. But I answer 2 things and you are still confused and don’t understand after a simple “yes” and how “being in our midst and not abandoning us” means He is really present. If as He tells us He is in our midst and will never abandon us, then He is really present whether in our homes, in a church, or at a Eucharist.

I think you knew exactly where that was going, anddid a good job dodging it.

This happens because you are so uncommitted.

He is smart to be non-committal in his responses. He has rightly discerned where this line of questioning is going.

We all have given you everything the Church offers you, but you reject everything that can lead you to truth, because somehow it is tainted. I am saddened by this, by your hardness of heart.

Only prayer can change this.

This kinda sounds like Bill Clinton saying it depends on what the definition of the word is, is, after having sexual relations.

I am glad you can see this in yourself.

I’m going by what you say here, not how you look on the outside. It’s what’s in your attitude that matters.

CM has made it clear that he does not hold Catholic faith in the Real Presence. He is hedging because He knows that, if this becomes clear, we will all respond to him with warnings that he is receiving while not in a state of grace or communion with the Church.

Well perhaps but how were their memories. And perhaps more importantly did they understand what the Apostles were saying and what they meant by their words.

What you are saying is that Jesus was too weak and disinterested to keep his promises to the church. He orphaned her, though He said He would not, he failed to “keep her in His Truth” as He promised, He did not lead her into all Truth, and allowed the gates of hell to prevail against her. He was unable to preserve the Word that He deposited to the Church.

This position takes away so much from Jesus, I don’t understand how someone can hold it, and still think he is a Christian!

Oh and I stand upright with my hands cupped to receive Him in His real presence btw. That’s still allowed by my bishop. Peace.

Oh, so when your bishop is teaching something that appeals to you, then you appeal to his authority, but when he is not, such as asking you to attend Mass on all Saints day, you suddenly have no use for his authority. How interesting!

 

[guanophore]

With attacks on Holy Mother Church at an all-time high, would anyone be surprised that there are people on forums who profess to be Catholic, but really wish to cause dissent and scandal by leading people astray?

Not surprised, but grieved and disappointed.

 

[guanophore]

If you will read my posts, you will see I take the Eucharist very seriously. You say you are Catholic. You say you know what the Church teaches. I asked you in several posts if you believed in the Real Presence, not the real presence. I asked you if you believed that Jesus’ flesh and blood were truly present in the Eucharist. I asked you several times. I appealed to your knowledge of Church Teaching, and you twisted my question to mean something completely different than the Teaching I was asking you about.

Your little 's and cutesy dodges belie your willingness to engage in serious conversation. You are the one who is playing games.

This is me:

CMatt has made it clear that he does not believe in the Eucharist as the Apostles believed and taught. He is wisely avoiding getting pinned down on this here, because everyone considered it a litmus test of Catholicity. I am not sure if he ever believed it. If he did, he has apostasized.

His view of the Eucharist, along with most of his theology, is Protestant. He has said he believes communion should be open, and has no problem with taking the Lord’s Supper among our separated brethren, or them taking communion at Mass.

 

[guanophore]

Well if Judas didn’t discern Christ Lord and Savior and didn’t discern the sacrifice He was about to make, then that has nothing to with me. So I certainly trust you were not comparing me to Judas Iscariot. But nevertheless, peace to you Lapey.

You have mistaken the meaning of discerning the Body and Blood. None of the Apostles understood the sacrifice He was about to make.

You do have some commonalities with the man from Iscariot. You both fail to discern the Body and Blood.

You also both could not receive the whole teaching of Christ.

You both think your way is better than His.

You both bring scandal to His name by identifying yourself with Him while rejecting the teachings.

 

[CMatt25]

we will all respond to him with warnings that he is receiving while not in a state of grace or communion with the Church.

This position takes away so much from Jesus, I don’t understand how someone can hold it, and still think he is a Christian!

Oh, so when your bishop is teaching something that appeals to you, then you appeal to his authority, but when he is not, such as asking you to attend Mass on all Saints day, you suddenly have no use for his authority. How interesting!

You don’t have to respond with anything. I already know the CC says I receive not in a state they define as grace. Remember I missed that All Saints Day and haven’t completed a Sacramental confession. So I face hell. I don’t believe for a nanosecond though that I face hell because of that. So I wouldn’t lose any sleep over you warning about it anyway.

I’m not sure if you understand the definition of a Christian then. But it doesn’t surprise me because you don’t seem to understand who is Catholic without a bunch of adjectives before it.

And I was attempting a bit of humor about the bishop still allowing the receipt of the Real Presence while standing in an upright position with cupped hands. Only because if he supposedly is in Apostolic succession, I know some supposedly devoutest Catholics who insist otherwise and say everyone should go back to kneeling and receiving with Jesus being placed into the mouth by the priest. But whatever appeals to them I guess.