The Universal Church

[Wannano]

So we are heretics, apostate and schismatic and at the same time brothers and sisters in Christ whose communities provide salvation for the souls of mankind.

Who can take such doublespeak seriously?

 

[mcq72]

Which is more difficult to believe:

If one cannot accept transubstantiation simply because it seems counter-intuitive or implausible,

Extra credit for efforts in intuition and plausibility or difficulty are vain if not reaching a correct faith conclusion.

Is it admirable to defy what is plausible and intuitive from a biblical or judeo- christian background?

 

[mcq72]

that’s why for clarification, we have definitions identifying people on the wrong side of things

Yes, we both do, though if I may humbly say the CC a bit moreso.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

It is you who couldn’t accept the clear language Augustine used. Besides, Augustine is a Catholic saint and doctor of the Church. He wouldn’t go contrary to Church teaching.

Well then, perhaps the CC later went contrary to the clear language of Augustine. However apparently Calvin did not, per post 1739.

You referring to HERE ?

Calvin couldn’t make the Eucharist happen. So your question?

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Which is more difficult to believe:

If one cannot accept transubstantiation simply because it seems counter-intuitive or implausible,

Extra credit for efforts in intuition and plausibility or difficulty are vain if not reaching a correct faith conclusion.

Is it admirable to defy what is plausible and intuitive from a biblical or judeo- christian background?

In asking that, Keep in mind, who founded the Protestants in all their stripes, and where THEY, as in all of THEM, over the last 500 yrs, began by person and by year…

NONE are “IN” the Catholic Church, the only Church Jesus established

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

that’s why for clarification, we have definitions identifying people on the wrong side of things

Yes, we both do, though if I may humbly say the CC a bit moreso.

Those definitions identify those who put themselves outside the CC

 

[mcq72]

Calvin couldn’t make the Eucharist happen.

Correct, not your kind of Eucharist, hence leaving more room for focusing our energy on this,

“It is broken for you: it is shed for you.”,

agreeing with Augustine’s,

we should (share in and) retain a sweet and profitable memory [in memoria] of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us.

So your question?

no question, just a beautiful observation of the two like minded theologians on said experience of communion.

Evidences then suggest such an encounter with Christ is not dependent on a valid priest and belief in miracle of transubstantiation for some of us.

Proof is in the pudding, that one can not tell afterwards who has believed in either of our communion beliefs. I know you say your clergy are valid and ours not, but would you say our “sweet and profitable memory” in Christ is invalid? Does it show afterwards?

 

[mcq72]

In asking that, Keep in mind, who founded the Protestants in all their stripes, and where THEY, as in all of THEM, over the last 500 yrs, began by person and by year…

NONE are “IN” the Catholic Church, the only Church Jesus established

well, once in a while a mule is right, and knows what to say to God’s prophet.

 

[mcq72]

Those definitions identify those who put themselves outside the CC

yes, and ours who have “come out from among them, and be ye separate,” ?

sorry, but knives just cut both ways.

 

[steve-b]

So we are heretics, apostate and schismatic and at the same time brothers and sisters in Christ

What makes us “brothers and sisters in Christ” is baptism

That doesn’t mean brothers and sisters aren’t or can’t divided from the family… and with no consequence

Let’s not forget the story of the Prodigal son.

While that prodigal son was away, what did his father say about him?

"this son of mine was dead … he was lost Lk 15:24
SO

Even while he was away,

Was he still brother to his brother? Yes

Point being,

If the prodigal remained away, he was dead to the father. Let’s not forget who is telling the story…It’s Jesus

Wannano:

whose communities provide salvation for the souls of mankind.

Who can take such doublespeak seriously?

As the Church teaches from Vat II (Lumen Gentium)

“Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.”

So

anyone who says after being given the truth, that one can remain in heresy, schism, and outside the Church, etc, and be saved ?

Now THAT would be double speak

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Calvin couldn’t make the Eucharist happen.

Correct, not your kind of Eucharist, hence leaving more room for focusing our energy on this,

When Jesus established the system, Who says one can have iit their way instead of His way, and everything is cool?

mcq72:

“It is broken for you: it is shed for you.”,

agreeing with Augustine’s,

we should (share in and) retain a sweet and profitable memory [in memoria] of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us.

in context, not out of context, Augustine was talking about a valid Eucharist.

So your question?

mcq72:

no question, just a beautiful observation of the two like minded theologians on said experience of communion.

Evidences then suggest such an encounter with Christ is not dependent on a valid priest and belief in miracle of transubstantiation for some of us.

Proof is in the pudding, that one can not tell afterwards who has believed in either of our communion beliefs. I know you say your clergy are valid and ours not, but would you say our “sweet and profitable memory” in Christ is invalid? Does it show afterwards?

The words may not have been around forever but Relativism and indifferent thinking, has been around forever.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Those definitions identify those who put themselves outside the CC

yes, and ours who have “come out from among them, and be ye separate,” ?

sorry, but knives just cut both ways.

AND

We can’t dismiss the fact, Paul’s teaching to Bp Titus here, is forever.

Titus 3:10-11 “As for a man who is factious αἱρετικὸν , after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is perverted ἐξέστραπται and sinful; he is self-condemned αὐτοκατάκριτος .”

Paul is talking to a Catholic bishop in the Catholic Church. The Church Jesus wants everyone to be perfectly one in. Jn 17:20-23

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

So we are heretics, apostate and schismatic and at the same time brothers and sisters in Christ

What makes us “brothers and sisters in Christ” is baptism

That doesn’t mean brothers and sisters aren’t or can’t divided from the family… and with no consequence

Let’s not forget the story of the Prodigal son.

While that prodigal son was away, what did his father say about him?

"this son of mine was dead … he was lost Lk 15:24
SO

Even while he was away,

Was he still brother to his brother? Yes

Point being,

If the prodigal remained away, he was dead to the father. Let’s not forget who is telling the story…It’s Jesus

Wannano:

whose communities provide salvation for the souls of mankind.

Who can take such doublespeak seriously?

As the Church teaches from Vat II (Lumen Gentium)

“Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.”

So

anyone who says after being given the truth, that one can remain in heresy, schism, and outside the Church, etc, and be saved ?

Now THAT would be double speak

Steve, you have a fine way of arguing by twisting words and concepts to suit your purposes and seemingly win your debates with impressive academic requirements.

However, your misapplication of the story of the Prodigal son is just too revealing. In all your ego centered superiority do you not realize that you have placed yourself as the older son?

 

[lanman87]

Calvin couldn’t make the Eucharist happen. So your question?

The post wasn’t about Calvin. It was about how you (and other Catholic apologist) see transubstantiation every time a church father writes that the bread is the body of Christ and the wine is the blood of Christ. I just pointing out that Protestant Theologians use the same language and will call the bread the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ and yet have a different understanding of how the bread is the body of Christ and the wine is the blood of Christ.

Therefore, whenever you quote a Church Father calling the wine the blood of Christ and the bread the body of Christ it doesn’t necessarily mean the writer believed in transubstantiation. It is also important to note that believing the the “Real Presence” of Christ in the bread and wine also doesn’t necessarily mean the writer believed in transubstantiation. Luther and Calvin both believed in the “real presence” of Christ and yet didn’t hold to transubstantiation.

If you are trying to use early church writing to prove the church always believed in transubstantiation then you need to prove more than they believed in the bread to be the body of Christ and the wine to be the blood of Christ. You also need to show that their concept of the “real presence” was different than Luther’s, Calvin’s, or even the Eastern Orthodox churches concept of the “real presence”. Furthermore, you need to show that the church was united in one single concept of the “real presence”.

This is where the Roman Church falls short. Historically, there were several concepts of how the bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ in the early church. The Roman church decided which concept it deemed to be the correct concept during the middle ages and then attempted to say that it was a universal belief from the beginning of the church. Which history shows, wasn’t the case.

 

[mcq72]

When Jesus established the system, Who says one can have iit their way instead of His way, and everything is cool?

exactly! Roman Catholicism certainly has its very own unique way, and lacks in showing it is Christ’s unique way.

 

[lanman87]

When Jesus established the system, Who says one can have iit their way instead of His way, and everything is cool?

That’s the rub, we believe we are having it Christ way and you have distorted Christ way by departing from the message of Christ by turning the simple message of believe, trust, follow, and love into a new law that rivals the mosaic law in its requirements of fasting, feasting and priestly sacrifice.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Truth is truth, regardless of a few contrary opinions.

Transubstantiation was defined in 1215. So I guess the gates of hell indeed, did, prevail against the Church for over 300 years since there were no protestant sects to clear things up for us? Is Jesus is a liar?

 

[Lenten_ashes]

simple message of believe, trust, follow, and love

Well formed Catholics believe ALL that, Ian. Where we think you guys have fallen off is the denial of good works and avoidance of sin as no longer a thing, when Jesus clearly preached the opposite.

I have spoken with protestant Christians who are so rabid about “faith alone” that the word or idea of ‘works’ seems to be a curse word or something. Actually, if you get a rational Catholic and a rational Protestant in the same room, you can actually meet at a point in which we almost agree on works/justification. We are simply speaking different languages and talking past one another, IMO.

 

[lanman87]

Transubstantiation was defined in 1215. So I guess the gates of hell indeed, did, prevail against the Church for over 300 years since there were no protestant sects to clear things up for us? Is Jesus is a liar?

The church is a people group who are the people of God, a royal priesthood a holy nation. . That people group still exist, both in the Roman church, the Orthodox church and Protestant churches, so I guess the gates of hell didn’t prevail.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Orthodox believe as we do – the host is Jesus, period. Protestant sects didn’t really exist for 300 years after 1215 council. So what about that 300 year gap? Plus they had the wrong bible for over a thousand years until Luther cleared things up for us. So it looks like the gates of hell had a field day with us, from a non-Catholic perspective.