The Joys of Catholicism

[God's Truth]

Not only do you twist Scripture...or destroy protestant understanding but now you even manage to mangle your catholic teachings...

This is not what is taught by them...He is not sacrificed billions of times but instead through the act of the Mass and the authority of the priest He comes again to that time of sacrifice again...its suspended in time by which they partake again of it...or something...

bahahahahaha

The time-transcendent dimension of Jesus’ unique and unrepeatable sacrificial death on Good Friday is such that he is referred to as “the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8). Dr. Scott Hahn comments: “The Mass is the ‘once for all,’ perfect sacrifice of Calvary, which is presented on heaven’s altar for all eternity. It is not a ‘repeat performance.’ There is only one sacrifice; it is perpetual and eternal, and so it needs never be repeated. Yet the Mass is our participation in that one sacrifice and in the eternal life of the Trinity in heaven, where the Lamb stands eternally “as if slain’ (Rev. 5:6)

but yeah not a repeated crucifixion...can’t keep the Romans that busy...lol

You don't even understand that the Bible doesn't say Jesus was crucified before he was crucified. Good grief; and you want to teach and correct others.

 

[clefty]

bahahahahaha

or something...

You don't even understand that the Bible doesn't say Jesus was crucified before he was crucified. Good grief; and you want to teach and correct others.

take it up with the author I cited...you are the former catholic so you should better know they do not teach He is crucified a billion times over again...but I must say I prefer you misrepresenting catholic teaching than what you do with your protestant understanding...

you might not follow catholic letter but you retain their spirit...

 

[KerimF]

Personally, I am not against any religious ritual which may be celebrated by certain believers anywhere on earth.

But Jesus, I know, says:
"And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him."

Should I have ignored this saying as formal Christians (of any Church/Denomination) are supposed to do?

Thank you in advance for any clarification.

 

[Idolater]

Not only do you twist Scripture...or destroy protestant understanding but now you even manage to mangle your catholic teachings...

This is not what is taught by them...He is not sacrificed billions of times but instead through the act of the Mass and the authority of the priest He comes again to that time of sacrifice again...its suspended in time by which they partake again of it...or something...

The time-transcendent dimension of Jesus’ unique and unrepeatable sacrificial death on Good Friday is such that he is referred to as “the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8). Dr. Scott Hahn comments: “The Mass is the ‘once for all,’ perfect sacrifice of Calvary, which is presented on heaven’s altar for all eternity. It is not a ‘repeat performance.’ There is only one sacrifice; it is perpetual and eternal, and so it needs never be repeated. Yet the Mass is our participation in that one sacrifice and in the eternal life of the Trinity in heaven, where the Lamb stands eternally “as if slain’ (Rev. 5:6)

https://catholicstrength.com/tag/the...us-on-calvary/

but yeah not a repeated crucifixion...can’t keep the Romans that busy...lol

That's a pretty good explanation for those who see a conflict between what they read in Scripture and what happens during Mass.

 

[clefty]

That's a pretty good explanation for those who see a conflict between what they read in Scripture and what happens during Mass.

And yet it remains popular that He is crucified for our present sins as even Mel Gibson himself held the nail which nailed his actor’s hand in his movie The Passion.

I wonder if the teaching of Eucharist ritual transubstantiation has progressed from when it was uneducated illiterate pagans which were being solicited with it...

Small wonder even protestants are deceived with “you kill Jesus with your sin”

Passover is not even a sin offering...odd that...

 

[Idolater]

not exactly like it was in Acts 2:42 but yeah breaking bread together...

so the Mass you assist... is it N.O. or Latin or?

Just curious as there is a desire by some to return to earlier tradition...again not exactly as it was in Acts 2:42 but earlier than 1960s V2 “modernization”

Latin was the language of Rome, so I'd imagine only the Church in Rome celebrated the Mass in Latin in the first century. Many, myself included though I wasn't born by the time the liturgical difference of the second Vatican council manifested, believe that the Tridentine Latin Mass is the historically ultimate form of the liturgy. To be able to witness such a sacred thing every week must have been amazing, and I believe that it will again become the most common form, once the Protestant and Orthodox conflicts are resolved. This is all imo of course. It's not in any way the Catholic view of the matter, and there are some parishes that are authorized to celebrate the Tridentine Mass even today, but far and away Mass is celebrated in the local vernacular of each parish, with many parishes celebrating Mass in more than one language (either as separates Masses, or even within a single Mass, where for example there is both English and Spanish spoken /sung).

 

[Idolater]

Personally, I am not against any religious ritual which may be celebrated by certain believers anywhere on earth.

But Jesus, I know, says:
"And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him."

Should I have ignored this saying as formal Christians (of any Church/Denomination) are supposed to do?

Thank you in advance for any clarification.

I don't understand your concern. You made "standing in the synagogues" bold, are you suggesting that corporate Christian prayer, such as at Mass, is what the Lord is condemning here? And as for the other "vain repetitions", I am supposing that you mean for example praying the Rosary? It's only vain if you make it vain. We are supposed to think about what we pray, not just recite from memory. That would be vain.

 

[KerimF]

I don't understand your concern. You made "standing in the synagogues" bold, are you suggesting that corporate Christian prayer, such as at Mass, is what the Lord is condemning here? And as for the other "vain repetitions", I am supposing that you mean for example praying the Rosary? It's only vain if you make it vain. We are supposed to think about what we pray, not just recite from memory. That would be vain.

Thank you.

 

[God's Truth]

or something...



take it up with the author I cited...you are the former catholic so you should better know they do not teach He is crucified a billion times over again...but I must say I prefer you misrepresenting catholic teaching than what you do with your protestant understanding...

you might not follow catholic letter but you retain their spirit...

There is no such thing in the Bible about Jesus being crucified before he came to earth and was crucified.

 

[clefty]

Latin was the language of Rome, so I'd imagine only the Church in Rome celebrated the Mass in Latin in the first century.

not so fast...only by 382AD saw the first translations into Latin of Greek manuscripts and the “Mass celebrated” was not as today...

Many, myself included though I wasn't born by the time the liturgical difference of the second Vatican council manifested, believe that the Tridentine Latin Mass is the historically ultimate form of the liturgy.

aaah yes...pomp and ceremony...must be grand...but not like the first century...

To be able to witness such a sacred thing every week must have been amazing, and I believe that it will again become the most common form, once the Protestant and Orthodox conflicts are resolved.

that could be...His way being the narrow path for a reason...

This is all imo of course. It's not in any way the Catholic view of the matter, and there are some parishes that are authorized to celebrate the Tridentine Mass even today, but far and away Mass is celebrated in the local vernacular of each parish, with many parishes celebrating Mass in more than one language (either as separates Masses, or even within a single Mass, where for example there is both English and Spanish spoken /sung).

so I take all that to mean you are assisting the N.O. mass...from what I can tell it is quite an issue within the church as some even claim since V2 the peters chair is empty...some changes from the first century church are too much it appears...

 

[clefty]

There is no such thing in the Bible about Jesus being crucified before he came to earth and was crucified.

take it up with the author I cited...you are the former catholic so you should better know they do not teach He is crucified a billion times over again...but I must say I prefer you misrepresenting catholic teaching than what you do with your protestant understanding...

you might not follow catholic letter but you retain their spirit...

 

[God's Truth]

take it up with the author I cited...you are the former catholic so you should better know they do not teach He is crucified a billion times over again..

The Catholics teach the eucharist is a sacrifice.

According to Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church "The Eucharist is the very sacrifice of the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus which he instituted to perpetuate the sacrifice of the cross throughout the ages until his return in glory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucha... Compendium of the,until his return in glory.

.but I must say I prefer you misrepresenting catholic teaching than what you do with your protestant understanding...

you might not follow catholic letter but you retain their spirit...

False witness.

 

[Idolater]

...from what I can tell it is quite an issue within the church as some even claim since V2 the peters chair is empty...

Yes I know, and you've mentioned it a number of times. There are sedevacantists. They protest (key word) the pope. They are just another Protestant. There are very many kinds of Noncatholics, Protestants being one very large umbrella, and sedevacantists are one of those, as they are definitely not Orthodox, which is another umbrella entirely.

And there was only one "umbrella" in the Apostolic era, and even for centuries thereafter. We call it Catholicism today. There was unmistakably one Church, there was not "Christianity" but rather the Church. There wasn't a reason to get more general in what to call her. Nowadays, with the Orthodox traditions (there are many of them not just one "Eastern Orthodox Church", that's a misnomer), and all the multitude of Protestant traditions, including whatever yours is and gt's too (where she is the pope of her own personal Protestant tradition), it's understandable to have to call us all by one name, and so "Christianity" is now a word. It means all those who believe in Christ, whether Catholic (i.e., part of the original Church tradition, marked plainly by the presence of the continuing office of bishop, that began during the Apostolic era, recorded for us in the New Testament, and never once even approaching obsolescence) or not.

So add sedevacantism to the long and seemingly unendingly growing list of Noncatholics that we have today. Nothing to see here, move along.

 

[clefty]

The Catholics teach the eucharist is a sacrifice.

According to Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church "The Eucharist is the very sacrifice of the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus which he instituted to perpetuate the sacrifice of the cross throughout the ages until his return in glory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucha... Compendium of the,until his return in glory.

see was that too hard?

Was it because I said crucified instead of sacrificed?...that was the method by which He was sacrificed...odd that Passover is not even a sin offering...

You notice it does not say what you repeated:

“He was sacrificed ONCE and for all not over and over a billion times at the hands of a Catholic priest.”

So what you cited is clear...Not sacrifices as in plural or multiple times...certainly not a billion...as billions of times is not enough times for how often the mass is done since it started...

False witness.

your Sabbath of everyday all day is not even according to Catholic tradition...nor traditionally protestant...but I guess your Sabbath...not holy nor set apart...full of iniquity...certainly not His Sabbaths

 

[clefty]

Yes I know, and you've mentioned it a number of times. There are sedevacantists. They protest (key word) the pope. They are just another Protestant.

they would certainly beg to differ there...as they protest PRO the office...Protestants protest CON the office and the man...

There are very many kinds of Noncatholics, Protestants being one very large umbrella, and sedevacantists are one of those, as they are definitely not Orthodox, which is another umbrella entirely.

And there was only one "umbrella" in the Apostolic era, and even for centuries thereafter. We call it Catholicism today. There was unmistakably one Church, there was not "Christianity" but rather the Church. There wasn't a reason to get more general in what to call her. Nowadays, with the Orthodox traditions (there are many of them not just one "Eastern Orthodox Church", that's a misnomer), and all the multitude of Protestant traditions, including whatever yours is and gt's too (where she is the pope of her own personal Protestant tradition), it's understandable to have to call us all by one name, and so "Christianity" is now a word. It means all those who believe in Christ, whether Catholic (i.e., part of the original Church tradition, marked plainly by the presence of the continuing office of bishop, that began during the Apostolic era, recorded for us in the New Testament, and never once even approaching obsolescence) or not.

So add sedevacantism to the long and seemingly unendingly growing list of Noncatholics that we have today. Nothing to see here, move along.

well I do admit that traditional militant church as a certain appeal that is bringing many “home”...the ancient tradition, the solemnity, the beauty, yes the very real presence of Christ masked by the bread...all seductive and effective modes of worship...add the images and incense candles and music and yes it offers much more than rock n roll for Jesus with fireworks and clever story tellers...

I do foresee it replacing the multi kulti liberation theology church of NICIE NICE which is the majority now...as it collapses WASP America wearing the PC glove inside remains the Roman iron fist...people will “come home” and return to the old ways of the traditions pomp and ceremony...like when 9/11 gave everyone a come to Jesus moment and church were full...

Yes the rise of militant church does have a powerful future...deus vult or something...

Already Lutherans etc have signed statements the reformation is over...

 

[God's Truth]

see was that too hard?

Was it because I said crucified instead of sacrificed?...that was the method by which He was sacrificed...odd that Passover is not even a sin offering...

You notice it does not say what you repeated:

“He was sacrificed ONCE and for all not over and over a billion times at the hands of a Catholic priest.”

So what you cited is clear...Not sacrifices as in plural or multiple times...certainly not a billion...as billions of times is not enough times for how often the mass is done since it started...

The Catholics teach that EVERY TIME a Eucharist is made it is a sacrifice.

your Sabbath of everyday all day is not even according to Catholic tradition...nor traditionally protestant...but I guess your Sabbath...not holy nor set apart...full of iniquity...certainly not His Sabbaths

Of course what I preach is not Catholic or Protestant.

 

[God's Truth]

clefty

There is even a service called Adoration, whereas parishioners can come to church, sit, and pray near the box of wafers, that box that they believe has the real body of Jesus. Catholics believe they can turn wine into the blood of Jesus. Jesus died once—on the cross, and the blood of Jesus shed once—on the cross. Jesus is not in a wafer. No one is turning the wafer into the body of Christ. No one is turning wine into Jesus’ blood.

 

[clefty]

The Catholics teach that EVERY TIME a Eucharist is made it is a sacrifice.

First you bare the same false witness as the slandering Jews in Acts 6:13-14 who claimed Stephen DID preach that Jesus DID change the customs Moses delivered...(Stephen did not as Jesus did NOT)

But now you insist to embarrass yourself with your misrepresentation of catholic teaching as well:

“The crucifixion was a one-time historical event. We must keep in mind, however, that Jesus is God. He was subject to time in His human nature, but in His Divine Nature, He is outside of time. Jesus is called “a priest for ever”: not for six hours on the cross only...

In this sense, the one crucifixion is “eternally present” and supernaturally “brought to us” in the Sacrifice of the Mass.
this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner, who once offered Himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross...

The notion of eucharistic sacrifice (in the Catholic sense) was common in the Church fathers' writings. Thus, one might misinterpret what Trent expressed, and come up with the notion of “sacrificed again and again”...

As a man, Jesus' sacrifice was in time and history. As God, outside of time (from that perspective), it is not. His being God brings in a “supra-historical” aspect in which time is transcended. This is what Protestants often seem to neglect. If Jesus is our high priest forever, He is still offering Himself, out of time, because that's what priests do

https://www.ncregister.com/blog/darm...-at-every-mass

Why do you twist so much?

They teach He is outside of law of time and outside of law of biology...timeless and unbloody...

Sadly this teaching has Him outside the Law of Yah as well...

Of course what I preach is not Catholic or Protestant.

Not biblical either...

yours is another gospel from another Christ...another everyday all day Sabbath...your sabbath

Paul was clear...He did NOT teach against the Law...and teaching to eat His flesh and drink His blood would be exactly that...

Acts 21:24 but he took a vow to prove he walks orderly and keeps the law

Acts 24: 12-14 he caused NO disputes...you think he could do that teaching Sabbath is now everyday? LOL but he was worshipping the God of his fathers according to the Way a Sabbath keeping sect believing ALL things OT...no NT yet...

Acts 25: 8 neither against the law of the jews (given to Israel) or the temple did he offend...I think teaching an everyday Sabbath would offend at least some Jews...

Acts 26: 20 Jews and Gentiles should repent turn to Yah and do works befitting repentance...you think YOUR everyday Sabbath is a work He established?

Acts 28:17 he claims to jews he did NOTHING against our people or the customs of our fathers...you think YOUR everyday Sabbath would NOT be against the pious zealous jews or their ancient customs?

Acts 28:28 Paul concludes that salvation of Yah has been sent to the Gentiles and they will hear it...so why would they need salvation if the Law was NOT to them? It was...and they crowded the synagogues every Sabbath...as James expected

Acts 16: 20 what were the gentile Philippians complaining? “They teach customs which are not lawful for us Romans to receive and observe” you think Romans would refuse Sunday Ham? Of course not but that was NOT on the table...

Acts 5: 40 you really think zealous jews wanting to KILL the apostles would agree with Gamaliel’s advice to leave them alone because teaching “the Sabbath was done away with it is everyday all day...let’s eat dogs” might actually be of Yah?

But you would have Paul teach otherwise in his letters...letters that could be submitted at his trials as evidence he was lying...IF they perjured him...they do not

Yup what you teach is NOT biblical...

 

[God's Truth]

First you bare the same false witness of Jew Acts 6:13-14 as if Stephen DID preach that Jesus did change the customs Moses delivered...(Stephen did not as Jesus did NOT)

Jesus fulfilled the law and the prophets. Since the law and prophets were about Jesus, of course there were changes.

What don't you get that Jesus is the Lamb and no more lamb sacrifices were needed after Jesus?

But now you insiste to embarrass yourself your catholic misrepresentation as well:

That is in your false thinking to defend your false beliefs.

“The crucifixion was a one-time historical event. We must keep in mind, however, that Jesus is God. He was subject to time in His human nature, but in His Divine Nature, He is outside of time. Jesus is called “a priest for ever”: not for six hours on the cross only...

In this sense, the one crucifixion is “eternally present” and supernaturally “brought to us” in the Sacrifice of the Mass.
this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner, who once offered Himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross...

The notion of eucharistic sacrifice (in the Catholic sense) was common in the Church fathers' writings. Thus, one might misinterpret what Trent expressed, and come up with the notion of “sacrificed again and again”...

As a man, Jesus' sacrifice was in time and history. As God, outside of time (from that perspective), it is not. His being God brings in a “supra-historical” aspect in which time is transcended. This is what Protestants often seem to neglect. If Jesus is our high priest forever, He is still offering Himself, out of time, because that's what priests do

https://www.ncregister.com/blog/darm...-at-every-mass

Why do you twist so much?

Not only is He outside of time but outside biology...timeless and unbloody

You can't get around the truth. The Catholics believe that the real flesh and blood is in the wafter.

Not biblical either...yours is another gospel another Christ...another everyday all day Sabbath...your Sabbath

Sabbaths were a shadow of Jesus.

Paul was clear...He did NOT teach against the Law...and teaching to eat His flesh and drink His blood would be exactly that...

Jesus says to believe him is to drink his blood and to obey him is to eat his flesh.

That does NOT mean we have to believe we are actually taking in his blood with the wine and with the wafer!

It means just believing his words IS AS DRINKING HIS BLOOD.

Jesus doesn't mean we have to eat a wafer and believe we are eating his flesh to be saved!

Jesus means to obey his commands IS AS EATING HIS FLESH.


Unless we eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, we have no life in us. Jesus tells us the truth, if anyone obeys his word, he will never see death, John 8:51.

 

[clefty]

clefty

There is even a service called Adoration, whereas parishioners can come to church, sit, and pray near the box of wafers, that box that they believe has the real body of Jesus. Catholics believe they can turn wine into the blood of Jesus. Jesus died once—on the cross, and the blood of Jesus shed once—on the cross. Jesus is not in a wafer. No one is turning the wafer into the body of Christ. No one is turning wine into Jesus’ blood.

Thanks...got it...

but I haven’t got an answer as to why those suffering with celiac disease get an allergic reaction to gluten if the bread is now actually His flesh...

is the allergen in only the Aristotlian accidents of the bread (what it looks like) and not in its substance?

Or does His flesh itself contain gluten...

Same with wine...if it is now His pure blood does alcohol remain? Does He need a breathalyzer?

Then remains the issue of leavened bread (eastern orthodox...as it was not a passover meal) or unleavened bread (roman rite...despite the passover lamb being killed the NEXT day)