R
RebeccaJ
Guest
I couldn’t think of any other reason for the contradiction in instructions.
Whatever they want to do, it’s their facsimile of the real thing, not mine.
- Status
Whatever they want to do, it’s their facsimile of the real thing, not mine.
B
BartBurk
Guest
Then that’s a change from my missionary days. I can remember being in wards where people were told the sacrament was only for members. Sounds like PR is more important to them than truth as usual.
D
dianaiad
Guest
It harks back to an experience Joseph Smith had. Long story short, turns out that it isn’t the liquid or bread used that matters. It is the intent and meaning. One might not always have wine available–but you can always find some water.
At least, that is our belief. does it really matter what you START with? It’s what it becomes that matters, through the priesthood blessing and the faith of those who partake. Although we do not believe in transubstantiation, we do place a very powerful faith in the symbolism of the sacrament.
D
dianaiad
Guest
Nobody will comment, or raise a fuss; nor will any authority come down and request that you refrain. However, as I explained to investigators when I was a missionary, the taking of the sacrament to us is a renewal of our baptismal covenants. As I would not partake of communion anywhere else, because I would consider doing so disrespectful to both my faith and theirs, I would request that a non-Mormon visitor refrain from partaking until he or she has been baptized.
As you can tell from the answers to this question on this thread, your ‘mileage may vary.’
D
dianaiad
Guest
Nothing wrong with either way of saying it. The only problem with non-members taking the sacrament is that it is meaningless. For them it is a swallow of water and a bit of bread, that’s all—UNLESS their own faith makes it something else, for them.
…and we should stop that, why?
As I said, I would ask investigators not to, because it would mean more to them if they waited until after their baptisms. However, I never criticized anyone for doing so.
I
ibkc
Guest
I, for one, respect your attitude greatly. It is a fine contrast with a certain other Mormon poster here.
H
happilycatholic
Guest
Hi Ruthie!
This is a wonderful prayer! I keep a prayer book and in it I keep a list of those who I can think of to pray for individually. I write a little short prayer at the end and this one is beautiful.
Thank you.
HC
(I apologize for being off topic)
F
FCEGM
Guest
Which illustrates the presumption of Joseph Smith to override the matter Christ Himself chose for the Eucharist. Not all symbols are mutable; some are natural symbols by creation and some are Divine symbols by God’s choice. Neither of these sorts of symbols can be changed or manipulated at will by subjective meanings as to their BEING. Other symbols are relative to a particular culture, or even to a particular person, but since all of life is not reducible to individual cultures or particular persons, neither are all symbols mutable by cultures or individuals. Some are created so by God (man and woman, water, earth, fire, light and darkness, air, etc.) and some have been Divinely chosen to mean what God intended them to mean, e.g., Bread for the Bread of Life (not potato chips or bananas) and wine (not water or Coca-Cola), the blood of the grape as the fruit of the vine, for the Blood of He Who IS the Vine. In the Sacraments the natural and man-made substances, actions, and persons means what God wants them to mean which the Church can only respect and has not the freedom unilaterally to alter without blasphemy because the Church is not the origin of them - but God IS.
D
dianaiad
Guest
T
truthsilence
Guest
Herein, is the difference.
The Eucharist is Christs body and blood, whether one believes it is or not. Our faith does not make it so, it is so.
I think this might help understand why we Catholics take such a serious position. We are commanded to.
Peace,
Tami
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
Is there a wine shortage?
B
BartBurk
Guest
You don’t have to have both. Christ is fully present in both the bread and the wine so you only are required to take one. I usually take both unless I have a cold.
D
dianaiad
Guest
Could be, in some circumstances…like the one Joseph found himself in, for instance.
The miracle of turning water into wine hasn’t been repeated. However, come to think of it, using water in the place of wine would be a sort of fitting commemorative; if faith turned water into wine once, by the Savior Himself, then why couldn’t the symbolism of water rather than wine in the sacrament be acceptable?
I
ibkc
Guest
Sure, why not anything? Forget the clear instructions of Christ Himself and the early church fathers. Just make it all up as you go along. That’s the spirit!
D
dianaiad
Guest
Don’t you roll your eyes at me, young man…Sure, why not anything? Forget the clear instructions of Christ Himself and the early church fathers. Just make it all up as you go along. That’s the spirit!
oh.
sorry.
Just a minute and let me put my 'inner mom" back in my pocket…
What part of “we believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet” seems to have escaped your notice?
God doesn’t do ANYTHING except through His prophets. Never has. Never will. All we know of Christ came through His apostles–who were prophets by definition. Christ Himself, remember, never wrote a single word.
We know that there were prophets after His death and resurrection–look at all the scripture written after that occurrence;come to think of it, the entire NT was written after that occurrence, wasn’t it?
So…we believe that Joseph was simply another one of them. Just like them. Like Paul; like Peter; Like Matthew.
If God told him that water was just fine, then…water is just fine.
I
ibkc
Guest
Don’t talk back to me, young lady.
Making assumptions about identities on Internet message boards is a sure recipe for failure.
Unfortunately, nothing.
Really? What prophet did God use to create the world?
You seem a bit too certain of what God can and can’t do for my tastes - but then, your god is not my God. Your god is limited, and only one of many. My God is limitless.
The era of public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle.
*Praise to the man who communed with Jehovah!
Jesus annointed that Prophet and Seer.
Blessed to open the last dispensation,
Kings shall extol him, and nations revere.
Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.
Praise to his mem’ry, he died as a martyr;
Honored and blest be his ever great name!
Long shall his blood, which was shed by assasins,
Plead unto heav’n while the earth lauds his fame.
Great is his glory and endless his priesthood.
Ever and ever the keys he will hold.
Faithful and true he will enter his kingdom,
Crowned in the midst of the prophets of old.
Sacrifice brings forth the blessings of heaven;
Earth must atone for the blood of that man.
Wake up the world for the conflict of justice.
Millions shall know ‘Brother Joseph’ again.
*Sounds to me like you guys have elevated Brother Joseph a wee bit higher than those other guys you mention.
I’ll take the words of the Christ Jesus, thanks.
Z
zaffiroborant
Guest
Sounds to me like you guys have elevated Brother Joseph a wee bit higher than those other guys you mention.
I’ll take the words of the Christ Jesus, thanks.
Anything on Earth atoning for those other guys blood?
D
dianaiad
Guest
Oh? You older than sixty?Don’t talk back to me, young lady.
Making assumptions about identities on Internet message boards is a sure recipe for failure.
actually, that was a bad paraphrase of Amos 4;7. It is my error that I said ‘do’ rather than ‘say’, as in "Surely the Lord God will do nothing but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.’ I got sloppy, and you rightly called me on it. Sorry…
Indeed? Yet your God doesn’t seem to be able to communicate with His people the way He (and His Son) used to–both before and after the resurrection of the Savior.
It’s an odd phenomenon, I have found; revelation is FINE as long as it happens to someone else a long time ago, but let it happen now–and it’s somehow distasteful, like using the wrong fork at dinner or something. Everybody denies that it could happen.
Yet if God is, then of course it would happen, one would think.
Why? There’s nothing in the bible that says it was supposed to. Certainly at first, as the apostles died off or whatever, they were replaced. Judas was replaced, Paul was an apostle (who did HE replace, I wonder?)
Where does it say that revelation was supposed to stop, and if so, when was it supposed to stop, and WHO SAID???
How do you figure?
Yeah, we sing a song of praise; not about Joseph so much as about the fact that God called a prophet again after so very many years.
I think that a Catholic, who sings things like 'Ave Maria," would understand the concept of songs of praise to those who are not God, or Jesus…
(shrug) Though we don’t place Joseph quite as high in our estimations as the Catholics do Mary, in most, if not all, respects. Shoot, we don’t place him as high in our estimations as Catholics place the most obscure of Saints. We do not pray to Joseph to intercede for us, for instance.
Of course, there is this:
Long Live The Pope
Long live the Pope His praises sound again and yet again
His rule is over space and time His throne the hearts of men
All hail the Shepherd King of Rome The theme of loving song
Let all the earth is glory sing And heav’n the strain prelong.
Let all the earth is glory sing And heav’n the strain prolong.
Beleaguered by the foes of earth Be set by hosts of hell.
He guards the loyal flock of Christ A watchful sentinel
And yet amid the din and strife The clash of mace and sword
He bears alone the shepherd staff This champion of the Lord
He bears alone the shepherd staff This champion of the Lord.
Or this:
God Bless Our Pope
Full in the panting heart of Rome
Beneath the apostle’s crowning Throne
From pilgrims’ lips that kiss the ground
Breathes in all tongues one only sound
“God bless our Pope, God bless our Pope
God Bless our Pope the great the good”
The golden roof the marble walls
The vaticans majestic halls
The note redoubles till it fills
With echoes sweet the seven hills
But here is one that we both sing, and mean from the bottom of our hearts…and frankly, I think we both sing the following one far more often than either one of us sings “Praise to the Man” or “God Bless our Pope.”
Jesus, the very thought of Thee
With sweetness fills the breast!
Yet sweeter far Thy face to see
And in Thy Presence rest.
No voice can sing, no heart can frame,
Nor can the memory find,
A sweeter sound than Jesus’ Name,
The Savior of mankind.
O hope of every contrite heart!
O joy of all the meek!
To those who fall, how kind Thou art!
How good to those who seek!
But what to those who find? Ah! this
Nor tongue nor pen can show
The love of Jesus, what it is,
None but His loved ones know.
Jesus! our only hope be Thou,
As Thou our prize shalt be;
In Thee be all our glory now,
And through eternity. Amen.
A
amontoya
Guest
“On that day, I will banish the names of the idols from the land, and they will be remembered no more,” declares the LORD Almighty. "I will remove both the prophets and the spirit of impurity from the land. And if anyone still prophesies, his father and mother, to whom he was born, will say to him, ‘You must die, because you have told lies in the LORD’s name.’ When he prophesies, his own parents will stab him. “On that day every prophet will be ashamed of his prophetic vision. He will not put on a prophet’s garment of hair in order to deceive.” Zechariah 13:2-4
This passage is from a prophecy about the time when the Christ would come.
I
ibkc
Guest
No, we don’t. I said “public revelation”. The history of the Catholic Church is filled with people who received private revelation from God via mystical experiences and apparitions, not mention events such as eucharistic miracles. The difference is that the Church does not take any such claim as true without a long process of investigation in order to determine if the messages are consistent with Church teaching and tradition. In this way the problem the Mormons have - the one where any “prophet” can strike down the revelations of any past prophet - is alleviated.
ETA: And, no one gets called “prophet” anymore. As the verse quoted above states, the time for prophets is long gone.
- Status