Taken
Well-Known Member
Well in scripture Christ's Body of Flesh was offered for the life of the world, and His Blood for forgiveness, so unlike you, I do see a distinct difference.
Are you catholic?
- Thread starter Rollo Tamasi
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Well in scripture Christ's Body of Flesh was offered for the life of the world, and His Blood for forgiveness, so unlike you, I do see a distinct difference.
I already explained that. But you are so hard headed...
The early Church offered Communion under both kinds, but starting in the 11th century and up until Vatican II, the norm and custom was to only offer the hosts. This is what was written in Vatican II about Communion under both kinds:
“The dogmatic principles which were laid down by the Council of Trent remaining intact, Communion under both kinds may be granted when the bishops think fit, not only to clerics and religious, but also to the laity, in cases to be determined by the Apostolic See.” – SC 55
Later, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal makes it even more permissive:
“Holy Communion has a more complete form as a sign when it is received under both kinds. For in this manner of reception a fuller sign of the Eucharistic banquet shines forth. Moreover there is a clearer expression of that will by which the new and everlasting covenant is ratified in the blood of the Lord and of the relationship of the Eucharistic banquet to the eschatological banquet in the Father’s kingdom.” -GIRM 281
The Crucifixion and the Eucharistic banquet is one and the same sacrifice.
John 19:29; cf. Matt. 27:48; Mark 15:36; – Jesus is provided wine (the Fourth Cup) on a hyssop branch which was used to sprinkle the lambs’ blood in Exodus 12:22. This ties Jesus’ sacrifice to the Passover lambs which had to be consumed in the seder meal which was ceremonially completed by drinking the Cup of Consummation. Then in John 19:30, Jesus says, “It is consummated.” The sacrifice began in the upper room and was completed on the cross. God’s love for humanity is made manifest.
But you can't believe that because you are a Protestant.
Matt. 26:30; Mark 14:26 – they sung the great Hallel, which traditionally followed the Third Cup of the seder meal, but did not drink the Fourth Cup of Consummation. The Passover sacrifice had begun, but was not yet finished. It continued in the Garden of Gethsemane and was consummated on the cross.
Matt. 26:39; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42; John 18:11 – our Lord acknowledges He has one more cup to drink. This is the Cup of Consummation which he will drink on the cross.
Psalm 116:13 – this passage references this cup of salvation. Jesus will offer this Cup as both Priest and Victim. This is the final cup of the New Testament Passover.
Luke 22:44 – after the Eucharist, Jesus sweats blood in the garden of Gethsemane. This shows that His sacrifice began in the Upper Room and connects the Passion to the seder meal where the lamb must not only be sacrificed, but consumed.
Matt. 27:34; Mark 15:23 – Jesus, in his Passion, refuses to even drink an opiate. The writers point this out to emphasize that the final cup will be drunk on the cross, after the Paschal Lamb’s sacrifice is completed.
John 19:23 – this verse describes the “chiton” garment Jesus wore when He offered Himself on the cross. These were worn by the Old Testament priests to offer sacrifices. See Exodus 28:4; Lev. 16:4.
1 Cor. 10:16 – Paul’s use of the phrase “the cup of blessing” refers to the Third Cup of the seder meal. This demonstrates that the seder meal is tied to Christ’s Eucharistic sacrifice.
John 19:34-35 – John conspicuously draws attention here. The blood (Eucharist) and water (baptism) make the fountain that cleanses sin as prophesied in Zech 13:1. Just like the birth of the first bride came from the rib of the first Adam, the birth of the second bride (the Church) came from the rib of the second Adam (Jesus). Gen. 2:22.
John 7:38 – out of His Heart shall flow rivers of living water, the Spirit. Consequently, Catholics devote themselves to Jesus’ Sacred Heart.
Matt. 2:1, Luke 2:4-7 – Jesus the bread of life was born in a feeding trough in the city of Bethlehem, which means “house of bread.”
Luke 2: 7,12 – Jesus was born in a “manger” (which means “to eat”). This symbolism reveals that Jesus took on flesh and was born to be food for the salvation of the world.
(d). The Eucharist Makes Present Jesus’ One Eternal Sacrifice; it’s Not Just a Symbolic Memorial
Gen. 14:18 – remember that Melchizedek’s bread and wine offering foreshadowed the sacramental re-presentation of Jesus’ offering.
Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 – the translation of Jesus’ words of consecration is “touto poieite tan eman anamnasin.” Jesus literally said “offer this as my memorial sacrifice.” The word “poiein” (do) refers to offering a sacrifice (see, e.g., Exodus 29:38-39, where God uses the same word – poieseis – regarding the sacrifice of the lambs on the altar). The word “anamnesis” (remembrance) also refers to a sacrifice which is really or actually made present in time by the power of God, as it reminds God of the actual event (see, e.g., Heb. 10:3; Num. 10:10). It is not just a memorial of a past event, but a past event made present in time.
In other words, the “sacrifice” is the “memorial” or “reminder.” If the Eucharist weren’t a sacrifice, Luke would have used the word “mnemosunon” (which is the word used to describe a nonsacrificial memorial. See, for example, Matt. 26:13; Mark 14:9; and especially Acts 10:4). So there are two memorials, one sacrificial (which Jesus instituted), and one non-sacrificial.
Lev. 24:7 – the word “memorial” in Hebrew in the sacrificial sense is “azkarah” which means to actually make present (see Lev. 2:2,9,16;5:12;6:5; Num.5:26 where “azkarah” refers to sacrifices that are currently offered and thus present in time). Jesus’ instruction to offer the bread and wine (which He changed into His body and blood) as a “memorial offering” demonstrates that the offering of His body and blood is made present in time over and over again.
THE EUCHARIST - Scripture Catholic
Matt. 26:39; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42; John 18:11 – our Lord acknowledges He has one more cup to drink. This is the Cup of Consummation which he will drink on the cross.
Psalm 116:13 – this passage references this cup of salvation. Jesus will offer this Cup as both Priest and Victim. This is the final cup of the New Testament Passover.
Luke 22:44 – after the Eucharist, Jesus sweats blood in the garden of Gethsemane. This shows that His sacrifice began in the Upper Room and connects the Passion to the seder meal where the lamb must not only be sacrificed, but consumed.
Matt. 27:34; Mark 15:23 – Jesus, in his Passion, refuses to even drink an opiate. The writers point this out to emphasize that the final cup will be drunk on the cross, after the Paschal Lamb’s sacrifice is completed.
John 19:23 – this verse describes the “chiton” garment Jesus wore when He offered Himself on the cross. These were worn by the Old Testament priests to offer sacrifices. See Exodus 28:4; Lev. 16:4.
1 Cor. 10:16 – Paul’s use of the phrase “the cup of blessing” refers to the Third Cup of the seder meal. This demonstrates that the seder meal is tied to Christ’s Eucharistic sacrifice.
John 19:34-35 – John conspicuously draws attention here. The blood (Eucharist) and water (baptism) make the fountain that cleanses sin as prophesied in Zech 13:1. Just like the birth of the first bride came from the rib of the first Adam, the birth of the second bride (the Church) came from the rib of the second Adam (Jesus). Gen. 2:22.
John 7:38 – out of His Heart shall flow rivers of living water, the Spirit. Consequently, Catholics devote themselves to Jesus’ Sacred Heart.
Matt. 2:1, Luke 2:4-7 – Jesus the bread of life was born in a feeding trough in the city of Bethlehem, which means “house of bread.”
Luke 2: 7,12 – Jesus was born in a “manger” (which means “to eat”). This symbolism reveals that Jesus took on flesh and was born to be food for the salvation of the world.
(d). The Eucharist Makes Present Jesus’ One Eternal Sacrifice; it’s Not Just a Symbolic Memorial
Gen. 14:18 – remember that Melchizedek’s bread and wine offering foreshadowed the sacramental re-presentation of Jesus’ offering.
Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 – the translation of Jesus’ words of consecration is “touto poieite tan eman anamnasin.” Jesus literally said “offer this as my memorial sacrifice.” The word “poiein” (do) refers to offering a sacrifice (see, e.g., Exodus 29:38-39, where God uses the same word – poieseis – regarding the sacrifice of the lambs on the altar). The word “anamnesis” (remembrance) also refers to a sacrifice which is really or actually made present in time by the power of God, as it reminds God of the actual event (see, e.g., Heb. 10:3; Num. 10:10). It is not just a memorial of a past event, but a past event made present in time.
In other words, the “sacrifice” is the “memorial” or “reminder.” If the Eucharist weren’t a sacrifice, Luke would have used the word “mnemosunon” (which is the word used to describe a nonsacrificial memorial. See, for example, Matt. 26:13; Mark 14:9; and especially Acts 10:4). So there are two memorials, one sacrificial (which Jesus instituted), and one non-sacrificial.
Lev. 24:7 – the word “memorial” in Hebrew in the sacrificial sense is “azkarah” which means to actually make present (see Lev. 2:2,9,16;5:12;6:5; Num.5:26 where “azkarah” refers to sacrifices that are currently offered and thus present in time). Jesus’ instruction to offer the bread and wine (which He changed into His body and blood) as a “memorial offering” demonstrates that the offering of His body and blood is made present in time over and over again.
THE EUCHARIST - Scripture Catholic
Taken
Well-Known Member
Sure I can believe Catholics change their traditions, but that was not the point.
What I said was Jesus gave his flesh body for the life of the world, and his blood for forgiveness.
John 6:51
...the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
Heb 9:12
...by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
Taken
Well-Known Member
Already establish and revealed and discussed, His flesh body and blood given is to be remembered.
The Bread Broken, His body, was for our life.
The Cup, His blood, is the NT of eternal redemption for us.
Tradition of eating the bread, and drinking the wine, IS in remembrance of what Jesus DID, for us.
1 Cor 11:24
1 Cor 11:25
Yet, the protocol of the tradition, appears to have greater significance with the Catholics, then WHAT His Broken Body and Giving of His Blood means.
He offered His body ONCE.
Heb 10:14
He offered His blood ONCE.
Heb 9:12
There IS NO MORE OFFERING.
Heb 10:14
"IF" ye are ABLE....accept His offered broken body, and His blood......and Ye ARE
Redeemed from sin, Sanctified, & Perfected.
Heb 10:10
Heb 10:14
Eph 1:17
"IF" ye HAVE accepted His GIFTS....
WHY KEEP asking FOR what He has ALREADY GIVEN YOU?
Men Routinely CLAIM they have ACCEPTED His broken body, His Blood......and Yet Routinely ASK for Forgiveness of Sins.
Why is the TRADITION more important than the MEANING of His Giving of His Body and His Blood?
Why PRETEND you have ACCEPTED His GIFTS, When you don't believe He has given those Gifts to you, and KEEPS YOU from Sin BY HIS POWER within You?
1 Pet 1:5
This is not just for YOU, a Catholic...
It is also for Protestants, who were not reformed from centuries of Catholic teaching.
Last edited:
You shouldn't talk about the Eucharist like that when you havn't a clue what you are talking about. You have your man made reformist opinions, that you claim rises above them. You are a reformed reformist reforming the former reformists. Your divisions are silly.
60 years after Luther did his nail job, there were 200 interpretations of "this is my body".
I have consistent teaching that has not changed in 2000 years. Obviously you are too hostile to find out what they are.
Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 – the translation of Jesus’ words of consecration is “touto poieite tan eman anamnasin.” Jesus literally said “offer this as my memorial sacrifice.” The word “poiein” (do) refers to offering a sacrifice (see, e.g., Exodus 29:38-39, where God uses the same word – poieseis – regarding the sacrifice of the lambs on the altar). The word “anamnesis” (remembrance) also refers to a sacrifice which is really or actually made present in time by the power of God, as it reminds God of the actual event (see, e.g., Heb. 10:3; Num. 10:10). It is not just a memorial of a past event, but a past event made present in time.
In other words, the “sacrifice” is the “memorial” or “reminder.” If the Eucharist weren’t a sacrifice, Luke would have used the word “mnemosunon” (which is the word used to describe a nonsacrificial memorial. See, for example, Matt. 26:13; Mark 14:9; and especially Acts 10:4). So there are two memorials, one sacrificial (which Jesus instituted), and one non-sacrificial.
Lev. 24:7 – the word “memorial” in Hebrew in the sacrificial sense is “azkarah” which means to actually make present (see Lev. 2:2,9,16;5:12;6:5; Num.5:26 where “azkarah” refers to sacrifices that are currently offered and thus present in time). Jesus’ instruction to offer the bread and wine (which He changed into His body and blood) as a “memorial offering” demonstrates that the offering of His body and blood is made present in time over and over again.
Num. 10:10 – in this verse, “remembrance” refers to a sacrifice, not just a symbolic memorial. So Jesus’ command to offer the memorial “in remembrance” of Him demonstrates that the memorial offering is indeed a sacrifice currently offered. It is a re-presentation of the actual sacrifice made present in time. It is as if the curtain of history is drawn and Calvary is made present to us.
Mal. 1:10-11 – Jesus’ command to his apostles to offer His memorial sacrifice of bread and wine which becomes His body and blood fulfills the prophecy that God would reject the Jewish sacrifices and receive a pure sacrifice offered in every place. This pure sacrifice of Christ is sacramentally re-presented from the rising of the sun to its setting in every place, as Malachi prophesied.
"memorial" does not mean storing in your cerebal cortex. Now you should use "memorial' biblically.
ONCE
Heb. 9:22 – blood is indeed required for the remission of sin. Jesus’ blood was shed once, but it is continually offered to the Father. This is why Jesus takes His blood, which was shed once and for all, into heaven. Heb. 9:12.
Heb. 9:23 – Jesus’ sacrifice, which is presented eternally to the Father in heaven, is described as “sacrifices” (in the plural) in the context of its re-presentation on earth (the author first writes about the earthly sacrifices of animals, and then the earthly offerings of Jesus Christ’s eternal sacrifice).
Heb. 9:23 – in this verse, the author writes that the Old Testament sacrifices were only copies of the heavenly things, but now heaven has better “sacrifices” than these. Why is the heavenly sacrifice called “sacrifices,” in the plural? This is because, while Christ’s sacrifice is transcendent in heaven, it touches down on earth and is sacramentally re-presented over and over again from the rising of the sun to its setting around the world by the priests of Christ’s Church. This is because all moments to God are present in their immediacy, and when we offer the memorial sacrifice to God, we ask God to make the sacrifice that is eternally present to Him also present to us. Jesus’ sacrifice also transcends time and space because it was the sacrifice of God Himself.
Heb. 9:12 – Jesus enters into heaven, the Holy Place, taking His own blood. How can this be? He wasn’t bleeding after the resurrection. This is because He enters into the heavenly sanctuary to mediate the covenant of His body and blood by eternally offering it to the Father. This offering is made present to us in the same manner as Melchizedek’s offering, under the appearance of bread and wine.
Heb. 9:14 – the blood of Christ offered in heaven purifies (present tense) our consciences from dead works to serve the living God. Christ’s offering is ongoing.
Heb. 9:22 – blood is indeed required for the remission of sin. Jesus’ blood was shed once, but it is continually offered to the Father. This is why Jesus takes His blood, which was shed once and for all, into heaven. Heb. 9:12.
Heb. 9:23 – Jesus’ sacrifice, which is presented eternally to the Father in heaven, is described as “sacrifices” (in the plural) in the context of its re-presentation on earth (the author first writes about the earthly sacrifices of animals, and then the earthly offerings of Jesus Christ’s eternal sacrifice).
Heb. 9:26 – Jesus’ once and for all appearance into heaven to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself shows that Jesus’ presence in heaven and His sacrifice are inseparable. This. also shows that “once for all,” which refers to Jesus’ appearance in heaven, means perpetual (it does not, and cannot mean, “over and done with” because Jesus is in heaven for eternity). “Once for all” also refers to Jesus’ suffering and death (Heb. 7:27; 9:12,26;10:10-14). But “once for all” never refers to Jesus’ sacrifice, which is eternally presented to the Father. This sacrifice is the Mal. 1:11 pure offering made present in every place from the rising of the sun to its setting in the Eucharist offered in the same manner as the Melchizedek offering.
Use "once for all" in biblical terms, not modernist terms.
The way you use the term "Tradition" has nothing to do with the proper use. In other words, you don't know what "Tradition" is. No sola scripturist can comprehend it.
Your "once saved always saved" was invented by John Calvin in the 16th century and it isn't biblical.
60 years after Luther did his nail job, there were 200 interpretations of "this is my body".
I have consistent teaching that has not changed in 2000 years. Obviously you are too hostile to find out what they are.
Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 – the translation of Jesus’ words of consecration is “touto poieite tan eman anamnasin.” Jesus literally said “offer this as my memorial sacrifice.” The word “poiein” (do) refers to offering a sacrifice (see, e.g., Exodus 29:38-39, where God uses the same word – poieseis – regarding the sacrifice of the lambs on the altar). The word “anamnesis” (remembrance) also refers to a sacrifice which is really or actually made present in time by the power of God, as it reminds God of the actual event (see, e.g., Heb. 10:3; Num. 10:10). It is not just a memorial of a past event, but a past event made present in time.
In other words, the “sacrifice” is the “memorial” or “reminder.” If the Eucharist weren’t a sacrifice, Luke would have used the word “mnemosunon” (which is the word used to describe a nonsacrificial memorial. See, for example, Matt. 26:13; Mark 14:9; and especially Acts 10:4). So there are two memorials, one sacrificial (which Jesus instituted), and one non-sacrificial.
Lev. 24:7 – the word “memorial” in Hebrew in the sacrificial sense is “azkarah” which means to actually make present (see Lev. 2:2,9,16;5:12;6:5; Num.5:26 where “azkarah” refers to sacrifices that are currently offered and thus present in time). Jesus’ instruction to offer the bread and wine (which He changed into His body and blood) as a “memorial offering” demonstrates that the offering of His body and blood is made present in time over and over again.
Num. 10:10 – in this verse, “remembrance” refers to a sacrifice, not just a symbolic memorial. So Jesus’ command to offer the memorial “in remembrance” of Him demonstrates that the memorial offering is indeed a sacrifice currently offered. It is a re-presentation of the actual sacrifice made present in time. It is as if the curtain of history is drawn and Calvary is made present to us.
Mal. 1:10-11 – Jesus’ command to his apostles to offer His memorial sacrifice of bread and wine which becomes His body and blood fulfills the prophecy that God would reject the Jewish sacrifices and receive a pure sacrifice offered in every place. This pure sacrifice of Christ is sacramentally re-presented from the rising of the sun to its setting in every place, as Malachi prophesied.
"memorial" does not mean storing in your cerebal cortex. Now you should use "memorial' biblically.
ONCE
Heb. 9:22 – blood is indeed required for the remission of sin. Jesus’ blood was shed once, but it is continually offered to the Father. This is why Jesus takes His blood, which was shed once and for all, into heaven. Heb. 9:12.
Heb. 9:23 – Jesus’ sacrifice, which is presented eternally to the Father in heaven, is described as “sacrifices” (in the plural) in the context of its re-presentation on earth (the author first writes about the earthly sacrifices of animals, and then the earthly offerings of Jesus Christ’s eternal sacrifice).
Heb. 9:23 – in this verse, the author writes that the Old Testament sacrifices were only copies of the heavenly things, but now heaven has better “sacrifices” than these. Why is the heavenly sacrifice called “sacrifices,” in the plural? This is because, while Christ’s sacrifice is transcendent in heaven, it touches down on earth and is sacramentally re-presented over and over again from the rising of the sun to its setting around the world by the priests of Christ’s Church. This is because all moments to God are present in their immediacy, and when we offer the memorial sacrifice to God, we ask God to make the sacrifice that is eternally present to Him also present to us. Jesus’ sacrifice also transcends time and space because it was the sacrifice of God Himself.
Heb. 9:12 – Jesus enters into heaven, the Holy Place, taking His own blood. How can this be? He wasn’t bleeding after the resurrection. This is because He enters into the heavenly sanctuary to mediate the covenant of His body and blood by eternally offering it to the Father. This offering is made present to us in the same manner as Melchizedek’s offering, under the appearance of bread and wine.
Heb. 9:14 – the blood of Christ offered in heaven purifies (present tense) our consciences from dead works to serve the living God. Christ’s offering is ongoing.
Heb. 9:22 – blood is indeed required for the remission of sin. Jesus’ blood was shed once, but it is continually offered to the Father. This is why Jesus takes His blood, which was shed once and for all, into heaven. Heb. 9:12.
Heb. 9:23 – Jesus’ sacrifice, which is presented eternally to the Father in heaven, is described as “sacrifices” (in the plural) in the context of its re-presentation on earth (the author first writes about the earthly sacrifices of animals, and then the earthly offerings of Jesus Christ’s eternal sacrifice).
Heb. 9:26 – Jesus’ once and for all appearance into heaven to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself shows that Jesus’ presence in heaven and His sacrifice are inseparable. This. also shows that “once for all,” which refers to Jesus’ appearance in heaven, means perpetual (it does not, and cannot mean, “over and done with” because Jesus is in heaven for eternity). “Once for all” also refers to Jesus’ suffering and death (Heb. 7:27; 9:12,26;10:10-14). But “once for all” never refers to Jesus’ sacrifice, which is eternally presented to the Father. This sacrifice is the Mal. 1:11 pure offering made present in every place from the rising of the sun to its setting in the Eucharist offered in the same manner as the Melchizedek offering.
Use "once for all" in biblical terms, not modernist terms.
The way you use the term "Tradition" has nothing to do with the proper use. In other words, you don't know what "Tradition" is. No sola scripturist can comprehend it.
Your "once saved always saved" was invented by John Calvin in the 16th century and it isn't biblical.
Last edited:
Taken
Well-Known Member
You are too boring carrying on and on.
Jesus broke bread, drank wine, gave his flesh body, his blood and said do the same if you are able.
Some are able. They willingly give their body, their blood Unto death. They willingly eat bread, drink wine in remembrance of Him and what He willingly gave.
What a shocking bit of information, people not yet born, were considered, that they could be cleansed by His Blood and saved and born again.
Another Catholic exclusive? LOL
What's a sola scripturist ?
And what the Catholic stance?? ONCE saved..
It requires repeating?
How many times have you been Saved?
Surely the Catholics must have a Tradition Repetative Ceremony for that? Eh?
Tell us, the Catholic Tradition and Ceremony for Repeatedly receiving Salvation...
Your earthy holy father is silly.
God provided "His People" with an earthly father; His name is Abraham.
Agree, in part. Your teaching IS like the Hebrews, requiring continuous forgiveness, securing they would receive salvation by works.
But your earthly holy father has changed numerous times....
My earthy faithful father remains constant!
LOL - Bullying tactics To delve into your psychobabble Catholic nonsense is a fail.
Try the Protestant way, of just inviting people to come and hear the Word of God.
Once you are saved it is for sure......
Unless you think you were and were not ! then............ that makes a great difference.
Some time we believe what a preacher says or friend....... and its not true.... BUT.........
If its in the bible ! It is true !
Unless you think you were and were not ! then............ that makes a great difference.
Some time we believe what a preacher says or friend....... and its not true.... BUT.........
If its in the bible ! It is true !
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 21,675
- 3,595
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Oh, great.
Ummmm, could you show me where the Bible says that once we are saved we cannot lose our secure position
Chapter and verse, please . . .
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 21,675
- 3,595
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Thanks for that immature response . . .
I simply educated you on the definition of "Pray" - and not only does it NOT always mean "worship" - that is a SECONDARY definition. The PRIMARY definition meas TO ASK.
I don't know which perverted translation of Scripture YOU'RE reading - but MY Bible says that those who are in the presence of Almighty God in Heaven are ALIVE. In fact - they are MORE alive that YOU are because they have been made perfect in Christ, whereas YOU haven't.
But you didn't say that.
YOU said that prayer = worship.
No - EVERY time YOU as me a question - you have just prayed to me.
That's what "Pray" means - as I have amply shown you, my linguistically-challenged friend . . .[/QUOTE]
My parents sent us to mass, they themselves did not go...we had to walk many blocks to go there, bearfoot too <---j/k
. We too were po foke---did not know it, was not close to my father..was very close to my mother-they were polar opposites in temperament! There were 7 of us (yeah, the rhythm method) The 4 older of us after years of doing this, finally decided to just run in, grab program papers then just turned around and walked out, lol...I do not recall having any money for the offering but, we would hang out by this plaza until we saw everyone leaving the Church...then we would go home. We did not think a thing about it then. It was not teaching scripture...I can say that I remember not a single Mass, what was talked about , I mean. We did not see it as sin, only as punishment if my parents found out. Good thing that Jesus died for our past, present and future sins=all, once , finished. He's not ever going to do it again because it worked the first time! Praise Our Great I Am!
You are always welcome to pay a 5 minute visit. Do you remember the sanctuary lamp? Ex 27:20-21 It's a red lamp that burns 24/7. It's an ordinance, commanded by God to burn perpetually. Forever. As a sign of His presence. Pay a visit and see it. Again. Don't talk, don't pray, don't read, just bask.My parents sent us to mass, they themselves did not go...we had to walk many blocks to go there, bearfoot too <---j/k
Good thing that Jesus died for our past, present and future sins=all, once , finished. He's not ever going to do it again because it worked the first time! Praise Our Great I Am!
[/QUOTE]
The reformers severed the umbilical cord between heaven and earth. That's why the doctrine of the Communion of Saints is so hard for them to understand.
No, it has been too long, I do not remember the red lamp. I do remember the candles always burning...they were real ones back then, lol. And the dark confessional booths...where they had that old double screen so you and the priest could not see each other directly.
" It's an ordinance, commanded by God to burn perpetually." <---Sure was! For the Israelites, who had to live under a law we were never even invited to...being gentiles and all.
Philip James
Well-Known Member
How can you say it was not teaching scripture if you dont remember what was said? Mass is almost entirely scripture. Perhaps you should come and hear?
Peace!
A horrifying example of "Thou shalt not bear false witness."
The False Story of "Sister Charlotte"
Sean, over at "Sean's Faith Website" has already done an excellent expose on this fake nun. I would just like to add some to his research.
Charlotte Keckler was a pseudonym used by a woman who traveled the country in the 60's, 70's and 80's claiming to have "escaped" from a Carmelite Convent. However, she never names this convent, just that it is "foreign". But in reading her story it is interesting to note that in this country everyone speaks English. England, possibly, but I was unable to locate any Carmelite convents in England. It could not be Canada because she states that part of her journey home was on a ship.
A "pastor" by the name of Reckart put up a website defending this one and giving his proof. His proof is her Social Security Death record:
According to the Social Security Number Decoder, we know that this SSN was issued in Florida in 1951. "Sister" Charlotte's testimony never mentions her living in Florida. That also raises the issue of where was she between 1898 and 1951? Turning to what we do know, thanks to Rootsweb, we can see her death record as well:
This gives us a little more info. But a search of the Iowa census at Heritage Quest does not reveal a Charlotte Keckler in Iowa at all in 1900, 1910 or 1920. Neither does it show her (alleged) brother John or sister Connie. So it appears the name she gave in death is as fictitious as her life. Add this to Sean's research and it can safely be said this woman was a fraud.
http://kmerian.blogspot.com/2008/06/false-story-of-sister-charlotte.html
Last edited:
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Wow...she sounds bitter and completely unwilling to take responsibility for her choices. She also sounds like she has no idea what any ritual even means. Nuns can leave and do leave monasteries all the time.
Similar threads
