Catholic Q & A

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
581

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
If we smoke cigarettes
[/quote]

I don’t get this, what are you talking about.[/quote]

Smoking is not on the big list of sins, but it is not what we were made for. If I am in the image of Christ and I destroy that image with cigarettes, self mutilation, letting my mind fall from grace to “addiction”, its not “becoming more perfect” is it? I would say that we don’t consider a single act of smoking a cigarette to be a sin, but letting yourself become obsessed with anything, putting anything in the place of God is less than ideal. [/quote]

Okay. You bring up self-mutilation. Do you see a difference between self-mutilation and mortification of the flesh?[/quote]

Short answer for now, yes, the same difference as eating and gluttony, sex and sexual perversion, but self mortification can be sinful too. Orthodoxy does not allow anything that disfigures the body, but the definition of disfiguring may be debatable. No tearing of the flesh.[/quote]

Catholicism does not allow the disfiguring of the body either. Just checking you. Seeing if you recognize the difference. I loved the reaction to John the Great’s habitual mortification of the flesh.

I keep this opinion to myself most of the time, but I think that the lack of mortification of the flesh is the reason for the masse of the people of G-d living in sin. People have seemed to forget two things about being a Christian, the Real Presence and mortification of the flesh. Everyone’s a nice person, but nice isn’t what we’re called to be. We are called to be kind and gentle, but we’re first called to die to the world even if we live in the world.[/quote]

I thought about this last night kneeling before the cross-on a nice soft carpeted floor and hearing the hymn: - YouTube. I remember visiting Romania where there are no seats or pews-people filling the Cathedral wall to wall and I remember kneeling on a stone floor and thinking that it was quite a different experience.

I will mention that in our tradition, fasting is much stricter. It is up to the individual to choose their “level” as it is considered to be spiritual exercise, but from the age of 7 there was no meat, dairy, or eggs in the house during lent. Fish was only allowed on a few Sunday’s. Oil and wine are excluded on certain days meaning to cooking with oil. We also will never eat before communion on Sunday and given an hour of matins and an hour and a half of Divine Liturgy, that typically occurs about 11:00 am giving new meaning to the term “break-fast”.

On the first week of lent and Good Friday, there is to be 1 meal of only boiled grains.

We would occasionally have cheese on someone’s birthday or annunciation although as for dairy our spiritual fathers typically only recommended us to read down the first 5 ingrediants on food items.

Plus we fast for 40 days before Christmas-at least from meat, and the time between Pentechost and the day of St. Peter and Paul, every Wednesday and Friday with one or two exceptions, the week before the Assumption, the day of the Beheading of John the Baptist.

I am not saying this to boast. It is a wonderful reward to fast.
[/quote]

Oh, no worries. I fast when I can, most of the time I have dispensation from fasting and vigil (although I do keep vigil a lot since I have a terrible time sleeping sometimes). The only reason I don’t fast is because I’m not physically able to at certain times (I work a heavy labor job, the one time I tried to fast while working I passed out on a ladder with 150 pounds of material on my shoulder, almost killed my boss) and as well, it is fitting that I was named after St. Christopher.

I have tried fasting, and I can do it for awhile (I fast for Divine Liturgy, Lent, Advent, Holy Week, Ash Wednesday, &c.) it just gets tough to the point that I can’t continue (not like my will isn’t strong enough, because it is I just end up getting physically ill or as I said passing out). Although I was thinking about fasting on beer and water next Advent like the monks.

582

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]newbatman wrote:
so how come this Catholic nun type lady showed up at my doctor’s appointment in Wilmington, DE and was waiting outside for me?

then she was waiting for me when I went to my health insurance appointment in New Castle?

then she would go to the football field at 10pm where I trained in Claymont when no one was ever there except her for months?

and how come she after a while of just showing up places finally flashed this white cross type badge thing at me that was under her vest?

and what about the other dude that did this stuff from 2006-2008 before she took over? and also flashed the white cross badge thing?

are they my friends?[/quote]

I am not sure what you’re talking about.[/quote]

I’ll take that as a: "(Uh oh…evasive action mode…Newbatman is back…and he is on the “Which Senators Are Sacrificing Children Thread again…and now he is on my thread the church put me on patrolling these boards with just because of him…let me call my supervisor) What?”

583

one time I fasted from vomitting every time I thought about the Catholic Church…

I could only keep it up for a few hours…

584

[quote]newbatman wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]newbatman wrote:
so how come this Catholic nun type lady showed up at my doctor’s appointment in Wilmington, DE and was waiting outside for me?

then she was waiting for me when I went to my health insurance appointment in New Castle?

then she would go to the football field at 10pm where I trained in Claymont when no one was ever there except her for months?

and how come she after a while of just showing up places finally flashed this white cross type badge thing at me that was under her vest?

and what about the other dude that did this stuff from 2006-2008 before she took over? and also flashed the white cross badge thing?

are they my friends?[/quote]

I am not sure what you’re talking about.[/quote]

I’ll take that as a: "(Uh oh…evasive action mode…Newbatman is back…and he is on the “Which Senators Are Sacrificing Children Thread again…and now he is on my thread the church put me on patrolling these boards with just because of him…let me call my supervisor) What?”[/quote]

Yes, the Pope called in 2005 because he knew the Catholic Q & A thread would pop up on T-Nation.com and you’d join in 2007. Called me from his personal phone, too. We spoke in secret dialect of Latin (that only supernumeraries and priests of Opus Dei know, yes that is right I’m part of Opus Dei) so no one could translate the conversation.

585

[quote]newbatman wrote:
one time I fasted from vomitting every time I thought about the Catholic Church…

I could only keep it up for a few hours…[/quote]

Sounds like you’re demoniacally possessed, might want to go see an exorcist about that.

586

so is that woman my friend I asked about yesterday?

587

[quote]newbatman wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]newbatman wrote:
so how come this Catholic nun type lady showed up at my doctor’s appointment in Wilmington, DE and was waiting outside for me?

then she was waiting for me when I went to my health insurance appointment in New Castle?

then she would go to the football field at 10pm where I trained in Claymont when no one was ever there except her for months?

and how come she after a while of just showing up places finally flashed this white cross type badge thing at me that was under her vest?

and what about the other dude that did this stuff from 2006-2008 before she took over? and also flashed the white cross badge thing?

are they my friends?[/quote]

I am not sure what you’re talking about.[/quote]

I’ll take that as a: "(Uh oh…evasive action mode…Newbatman is back…and he is on the “Which Senators Are Sacrificing Children Thread again…and now he is on my thread the church put me on patrolling these boards with just because of him…let me call my supervisor) What?”[/quote]

she seemed like a good person…

588

[quote]newbatman wrote:
so is that woman my friend I asked about yesterday?[/quote]

I don’t know what you’re talking about.

589

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Link: What is Ripple All About? read every word. Holy precious Lord Jesus!!! That piece is positively erupting with truth that no person in whom dwells the Spirit of the living God would dare deny. Like I told Pat (the quintessential target of this article) several weeks ago when he and forlife were ganging up on me again. Jesus Christ of Nazareth did not HAVE a message. Of love or anything else. HE WAS AND IS THE MESSAGE in whom, to whom, by whom and for whom is the sum of ALL CREATION AND HISTORY. The heartbreakingly tragic thing is that what this man prescribes IS exactly the cause of the very deadness he so rightly and abundantly decries. I don’t have time now, but there are a few things I just have to comment further on in there.

You’re off in the swampy weeds Chris, but you’re meandering generally in the right direction and the path just might be visible from where you are.[/quote]You mean that the synthesis of the Bible is Jesus? I’ve been saying that forever, and like it says IN the Bible to get your nose out of the Bible as Jesus said in John 5:39, “You search the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life,” because he was really Present. Just as Jesus’ Real Presence is in the Eucharist.[/quote]They were searching the old testament scriptures which Jesus fulfilled resulting in His real presence in my heart. It’s the idolatrous worship of a cookie and grape juice that has robbed people like this man of what he appears at least to long for. This piece deserves a ten page dissertation and is by far the most substantive piece of Catholic thought I’ve read in recent memory. I’ll have more as soon as I can.

590

Foreseeing thy divine humiliation on the Cross, Habakkuk cried out trembling: Thou didst shatter the dominion of the mighty by joining those in hell as the almighty God.

591

Isaiah saw the never-setting light of the compassionate manifestation to us as God, O Christ. Rising early from the night he cried out, â??The dead shall arise.â?? Those in the tombs shall awake. All those on earth shall greatly rejoice.

592

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Link: www.insidecatholic.com/feature/what-i-learned-from-a-muslim-about-eucharistic-adoration.html[/quote]I read every word. Holy precious Lord Jesus!!! That piece is positively erupting with truth that no person in whom dwells the Spirit of the living God would dare deny. Like I told Pat (the quintessential target of this article) several weeks ago when he and forlife were ganging up on me again. Jesus Christ of Nazareth did not HAVE a message. Of love or anything else. HE WAS AND IS THE MESSAGE in whom, to whom, by whom and for whom is the sum of ALL CREATION AND HISTORY. The heartbreakingly tragic thing is that what this man prescribes IS exactly the cause of the very deadness he so rightly and abundantly decries. I don’t have time now, but there are a few things I just have to comment further on in there.

You’re off in the swampy weeds Chris, but you’re meandering generally in the right direction and the path just might be visible from where you are.[/quote]You mean that the synthesis of the Bible is Jesus? I’ve been saying that forever, and like it says IN the Bible to get your nose out of the Bible as Jesus said in John 5:39, “You search the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life,” because he was really Present. Just as Jesus’ Real Presence is in the Eucharist.[/quote]

They were searching the old testament scriptures which Jesus fulfilled resulting in His real presence in my heart.[/quote]

Not everything was fulfilled in the OT. That is probably why you think the law has passed.

Jesus instituted that ‘cookie’ and wine, not grape juice. I can’t help if you can’t understand what gnaw on my flesh and drink my blood means.

[quote]This piece deserves a ten page dissertation and is by far the most substantive piece of Catholic thought I’ve read in recent memory. I’ll have more as soon as I can.
[/quote]

What that you’re going to tell me Jesus’s disciples left in John 6 because he was talking about a symbol, who was the last person (not going to the actual Bread of Life in the Catholic Church) you knew who left because you were eating symbols? That is what I thought.

That when he said gnaw on my flesh and drink my blood three times he just meant symbolically? There is many words for eat in Aramaic why’d he pick the one that mean gnaw?

Believing it is a symbol is denying the Jewishness and the real presence of the passover in which Jews remembered the Passover, not remembering as in recalling to memory as they weren’t there during the passover, but they made the passover present…they were at the passover of the Lord, just as we make Jesus’ sacrifice present in the Mass everyday because he is the Pascal Lamb.

Jesus is the Manna in the desert, the bread of life that comes down from Heaven to nourish the Jews in the desert. He is the lamb in which those in the household are required to eat. If it’s a symbol, to hell with it. It really is the center of my existence. And, if it is not really Jesus then it is all a lie.

593

I don’t think the law has passed the way you think I think it has. Just keep on gnawin there Chris. I have confidence that you will one day see that the people who left Him over His body and blood were just as wrong as you are. Believing it is now a symbol (though not MERELY a symbol, baptism either) comports EXACTLY with the authentic spiritual Jewishness absolutely everywhere proclaimed in the new testament. We had communion yesterday, good Friday. There is real efficacious grace dispensed thereby, but believing it is the fullness of actual Christ worthy of full open latria and to be literally eaten, gnawed upon, is plain rank christianized voodoo superstition that could not be further from anything Jewish (or Christian) if God himself designed it to be, which we will probably one day find out He did in fact do.

EDIT: Oh yeah, this wasn’t the only or maybe even the primary area I’m still going to comment on when I get a chance.

594

@newbatman:
I suspect that a coherent and substantive post is simply beyond your powers and will accordingly refrain from holding the lack of same against you.

595

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I don’t think the law has passed the way you think I think it has. Just keep on gnawin there Chris. I have confidence that you will one day see that the people who left Him over His body and blood were just as wrong as you are. Believing it is now a symbol (though not MERELY a symbol, baptism either) comports EXACTLY with the authentic spiritual Jewishness absolutely everywhere proclaimed in the new testament. We had communion yesterday, good Friday. There is real efficacious grace dispensed thereby, but believing it is the fullness of actual Christ worthy of full open latria and to be literally eaten, gnawed upon, is plain rank christianized voodoo superstition that could not be further from anything Jewish (or Christian) if God himself designed it to be, which we will probably one day find out He did in fact do.

EDIT: Oh yeah, this wasn’t the only or maybe even the primary area I’m still going to comment on when I get a chance.[/quote]

There are no symbols in the Kingdom of Heaven to which we are joined. No symbols, only real things, and the only real food is the risen and glorified body of Jesus Christ. How can there be ANY real eternal food and drink that is a mere creature or creation of God? The Kingdom of Heaven is not a kingdom of symbols and types, but of only pure things, and archtypes of what we can comprehend today.

596

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I don’t think the law has passed the way you think I think it has. Just keep on gnawin there Chris. I have confidence that you will one day see that the people who left Him over His body and blood were just as wrong as you are. Believing it is now a symbol (though not MERELY a symbol, baptism either) comports EXACTLY with the authentic spiritual Jewishness absolutely everywhere proclaimed in the new testament. We had communion yesterday, good Friday. There is real efficacious grace dispensed thereby, but believing it is the fullness of actual Christ worthy of full open latria and to be literally eaten, gnawed upon, is plain rank christianized voodoo superstition that could not be further from anything Jewish (or Christian) if God himself designed it to be, which we will probably one day find out He did in fact do.

EDIT: Oh yeah, this wasn’t the only or maybe even the primary area I’m still going to comment on when I get a chance.[/quote]

It’s not a symbol, the Bible doesn’t say it’s a symbol, the early Church Father’s don’t say it is a symbol, it is not a symbol.

597

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I wanted to post this, so maybe people will understand more deeply why I am Catholic and why I will never leave the Eucharist (so much so that I routinely run late in the morning because of my Holy hour that is usually more like a Holy hour and a half. I don’t blame you for thinking I’m crazy, the Crucifix and the Eucharist is a stumbling block as Jesus himself was to the Jews.

This article originally appeared in the March 1998 issue of Crisis Magazine.[/quote]

Link: What is Ripple All About?

Excellent. [/quote]

Nice article. At first, I was somewhat surprised it was from a catholic site. But then the writer seems to limit Christ’s presence to mostly the Eucharist and Church people, and that is a very catholic view. He started to do the same thing he was trying to expose! Regardless, it’s still a commendable article. Thanks for posting it.

598

[quote]Sweet Revenge wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I wanted to post this, so maybe people will understand more deeply why I am Catholic and why I will never leave the Eucharist (so much so that I routinely run late in the morning because of my Holy hour that is usually more like a Holy hour and a half. I don’t blame you for thinking I’m crazy, the Crucifix and the Eucharist is a stumbling block as Jesus himself was to the Jews.

This article originally appeared in the March 1998 issue of Crisis Magazine.[/quote]

Link: What is Ripple All About?

Excellent. [/quote]

Nice article. At first, I was somewhat surprised it was from a catholic site. But then the writer seems to limit Christ’s presence to mostly the Eucharist and Church people, and that is a very catholic view. He started to do the same thing he was trying to expose! Regardless, it’s still a commendable article. Thanks for posting it.[/quote]

That’s because Catholics are not Pluralist or pantheist. We believe G-d’s presence is everywhere, but Jesus’ presence par excellence is in the Eucharist.

599

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< It’s not a symbol, the Bible doesn’t say it’s a symbol, the early Church Father’s don’t say it is a symbol, it is not a symbol.[/quote]I gotta go with the Westminster divines again.
The Cpnfession of 1646
CHAPTER XXIX.
Of the Lord’s Supper.

I. Our Lord Jesus, in the night wherein he was betrayed, instituted the sacrament of his body and blood, called the Lord’s Supper, to be observed in his Church unto the end of the world; for the perpetual remembrance of the sacrifice of himself in his death, the sealing all benefits thereof unto true believers, their spiritual nourishment and growth in him, their further engagement in and to all duties which they owe unto him; and to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other, as members of his mystical body.

II. In this sacrament Christ is not offered up to his Father, nor any real sacrifice made at all for remission of sins of the quick or dead, but a commemoration of that one offering up of himself, by himself, upon the cross, once for all, and a spiritual oblation of all possible praise unto God for the same; so that the Popish sacrifice of the mass, as they call it, is most abominably injurious to Christ’s one only sacrifice, the alone propitiation for all the sins of the elect.

III. The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed his ministers to declare his word of institution to the people, to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine, and thereby to set them apart from a common to an holy use; and to take and break the bread, to take the cup, and (they communicating also themselves) to give both to the communicants; but to none who are not then present in the congregation.

IV. Private masses, or receiving this sacrament by a priest, or any other, alone; as likewise the denial of the cup to the people; worshipping the elements, the lifting them up, or carrying them about for adoration, and the reserving them for any pretended religious use, are all contrary to the nature of this sacrament, and to the institution of Christ.

V. The outward elements in this sacrament, duly set apart to the uses ordained by Christ, have such relation to him crucified, as that truly, yet sacramentally only, they are sometimes called by the name of the things they represent, to wit, the body and blood of Christ; albeit, in substance and nature, they still remain truly, and only, bread and wine, as they were before.

VI. That doctrine which maintains a change of the substance of bread and wine, into the substance of Christ’s body and blood (commonly called transubstantiation) by consecration of a priest, or by any other way, is repugnant, not to Scripture alone, but even to common-sense and reason; overthroweth the nature of the sacrament; and hath been, and is, the cause of manifold superstitions, yea, of gross idolatries.

VII. Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements in this sacrament, do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually, receive and feed upon Christ crucified, and all benefits of his death: the body and blood of Christ being then not corporally or carnally in, with, or under the bread and wine; yet as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.

VIII. Although ignorant and wicked men receive the outward elements in this sacrament, yet they receive not the thing signified thereby; but by their unworthy coming thereunto are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, to their own damnation. Wherefore all ignorant and ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy communion with him, so are they unworthy of the Lord’s table, and can not, without great sin against Christ, while they remain such, partake of these holy mysteries, or be admitted thereunto.

600

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< It’s not a symbol, the Bible doesn’t say it’s a symbol, the early Church Father’s don’t say it is a symbol, it is not a symbol.[/quote]I gotta go with the Westminster divines again.
[/quote]

You go with the guys in 1646, I’ll go with guys like Ignatius of Antioch in 110 (did I mention he personally knew some of the Apostles):

[quote]“I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible” (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).

“Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2â??7:1 [A.D. 110]).[/quote]

In addition to Ignatius, Justin Martyr:

As well, the Council of Nicaea:

And, St. Augustine in 400’s:

[quote]“Christ was carried in his own hands when, referring to his own body, he said, â??This is my bodyâ?? [Matt. 26:26]. For he carried that body in his hands” (Explanations of the Psalms 33:1:10 [A.D. 405]).

“I promised you [new Christians], who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the sacrament of the Lordâ??s Table. . . . That bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ” (Sermons 227 [A.D. 411]).

…

“What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith; yet faith does not desire instruction” (ibid., 272).[/quote]

You going to believe a group of men a millennium and 6 centuries after Jesus and his Apostles had died, or you going to believe a group of men that knew the Apostles and their disciples personally and men of such great authority as Augustine?

I’ll bet my life on the latter.