Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Actually, the Inquisitions (the Spanish Inquisition wasn't the only one) were conducted to ensure that Jews and Muslims weren't faking at being Christians.<< Correct. But the Spanish Inquisition was (unfortunately) especially brutal. Civil authorities were the ones who doled out the punishement, and the Spanish Crown was very cruel.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>That may have been true in Spain, but it wasn't true in other parts of the world.<< Don't get me wrong. Christendom has indeed been under siege by Islam from day 1. North Africa used to be Christian. Now its virtually 100% Muslim.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>I keep wondering why, oh why, it need be so complicated. All the pagentry and stuff. Jesus lived a simple life. Carpenter. Modest. Didn't seem to go for all the falderal. Didn't go around wearing beautiful tapestries. Spoke to the people in simple, clear, loving, understandable ways, like a father to His children.<< While this is true, as Christians we must remember that Christ is both man and God. As God he is truly worthy of all pageantry (and stuff).
Originally Posted By BlueDevilSF ^^^ God, yes, perhaps, if you're a believer...but the Pope, no. Ostentatiousness is so unbecoming.
Originally Posted By cmpaley The Papacy is an interesting office. If you understand that the Church is an extension of Israel (not the current country, but the Hebrew nation from the Old Testament), this all becomes clear...the Pope is the Prime Minister. He has the authority of the King (Jesus) and acts in the name of the King. Now, on to transubstantiation...let's remember the setting of the Institution of the Sacrament...the Passover Seder. Go back to the first Passover. What were the Hebrews commanded to eat? The meat of the sacrificed Lamb. God didn't leave an option for alternatives. You had to eat lamb meat...not cookies, not beef, not mashed potatoes. The main course of the Passover meal was lamb. You had to eat the lamb. Who is the Lamb of God (we say it at every Mass)....Jesus is the Lamb of God. This is why Catholicism is holistic in nature. EVERYTHING works together and omitting things here and there ruins unity of the theology.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>Come on CM? EVERYONE knows God made us all different and unique. Joel says it every week on tv. Of course we all have things inherently the same, but why the argument about such a basich truth? No 2 people have the same dna and on and on. What's the deal here? You just want to argue? No two human beings are the same? I'd like to see you prove that wrong? And why bring in political parties? I'm an independent for the zillionth time. God is not political.<< Once again, where does this come from? It seems like you're making an issue out of something I never said. I do agree that God is not political...He is above politics.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer But even if transsubstantiation is true, why deny communion to your guests? Wouldn't they benefit from it, even if they weren't believers?
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>But even if transsubstantiation is true, why deny communion to your guests? Wouldn't they benefit from it, even if they weren't believers?<< First, because of the unity aspect of receiving of the Sacrament. It is a public profession that you agree with the whole teaching of the church where you receive. It's not just a Catholic practice. Missouri Synod Lutherans also practice Close Communion. Second, because communicants must be properly disposed to partake of the Sacrament. For the Catholic, that means that one must be in the state of grace (not aware of any unconfessed mortal sin) in order to receive. For the Lutheran, that means that you must believe the words "given and shed for you" and that the forgiveness of sins is received through the sacrament. Just a note: Lutherans believe in "consubstantiation" (that is, the body and blood of Christ are present in with and under the bread and wine) not transubstantiation (that is, the substance of the bread and wine are changed during the consecration into the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ and only the accidents (appearance, taste, smell, etc.) of bread and wine remain.).
Originally Posted By cape cod joe CM--Are you alright read your post 36! post 46--Once again--What are you talking about CM?
Originally Posted By cmpaley CCJ, I'd like to know what YOU are talking about. My response to your post in 36 was pretty clear. We're all created in the image and likeness of God. If you deny that, you deny scripture. That doesn't mean that everyone is the same. It means that our DIGNITY as HUMAN PERSONS is equal. No person is worth more or less than any other person because everyone possesses the dignity of being a human person created in the image and likeness of God.
Originally Posted By cmpaley One other thought... >>Wouldn't they benefit from it, even if they weren't believers?<< NO! In fact, St. Paul tells us: 1 Cor. 11:27-30 "Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep."
Originally Posted By cape cod joe cm--your post 36 says where does that come from---Didn't you mean my idea that you quoted that all people are different? Where does that come from? Weren't you disagreeing with my premise? Maybe just a posting e mail miscommunication. I thought your post was arguing with my premise that God created everyone different?
Originally Posted By cmpaley cm--your post 36 says where does that come from---Didn't you mean my idea that you quoted that all people are different? Where does that come from? Weren't you disagreeing with my premise? Maybe just a posting e mail miscommunication. I thought your post was arguing with my premise that God created everyone different?<< Well, typically when someone is having a discussion, they try to make what they say relative to what the person they are addressing is talking about. You came at me out of left field. Now, reread my last post to you and you'll have an answer to your question.
Originally Posted By cape cod joe CM--Like Tom----whhoooossshhh way over my bald head. I take it that you were not arguing. That's why the older I get the more I go by my wife's aphorism "Be slow to err" I err quickly as I have too much of my one drug of choice>caffeine. This stuff is best left to verbal communica.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer cmpaley, when I read 1 Cor 11 in it's entirety, Paul is referring to the manner in which the congregants are celebrating the last supper. 1 Cor 20-22 When you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper you eat, 21for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk. 22Don't you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not! And then the part after your citation (1 Cor 33-34): So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for each other. (34If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment. To me, the "unworthy manner" that Paul is speaking of us more to do with not sharing the meal as a community and making sure that everyone is fed. "Without recognizing the body of the Lord" could just as easily mean that if the person doesn't recognize that the church is the body of Christ and eats without regard to others, he is unworthy.
Originally Posted By fkurucz What I find interesting is that all of the ancient churches (Latin, Greek, Coptic, Armenian, Assyrian, Maronite, Malabar, etc.) believe in the mystical presence of the Lord in Eucharist. It wasn't until the Reformation that this belief was discarded by Calvin and his followers.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer It wasn't until the 4th or 5th Century that the doctrine started, either. Funny that, too.
Originally Posted By cape cod joe Is there any hope for people like me and my friend in Phoenix who have NO clue about all this stuff and just believe in the Lord almighty and try to be the best human beings we can?
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Of course, ccj. cmpaley and I are rehasing arguments that have been made over and over again about doctrinal issues, and I think over time the doctrine becomes mistaken for the faith. I think when doctrines exclude people from the invitation that Christ extended to everyone they are getting awfully close to idolatry. We should always err on the side of inclusion and graciousness.
