Mr G writes: YOU CARE NOT ONE IOTA THAT YOUR POPES ARE ALL LEADING YOU SLOWLY BUT SURELY AWAY FROM WORSHIPING THE LIVING CHRIST AS SPIRIT IN HEAVEN. SATAN WANTS YOUR POPE TO INVENT NEW SUBSTITUTES FOR CHRIST (THE WAFER GOD, THE EUCHARIST GOD, THE "VIRGIN" MARY, etc.).
My response: I have to disagree with your view about the popes "leading you slowly but surely away from worshiping the living Christ". We Catholics worship Christ all the time, most especially during our mass. I am sure Satan wants a lot of things, that doesn't mean he's going to get it. Satan would love for people to fall away from Christ's Church and fall into one deception or another. Satan is a deceiver and liar and unfortunately many do fall into his traps and others willingly run to Satan rather than our Savior Jesus Christ. This is a tragedy beyond all else, as nothing is more important than the eternal souls of people. Jesus does not wish that any should be lost, but he doesn't force us against our will. We come willingly to Him, repenting of our sins and He forgives us and welcomes us to Him with open arms.
My response: I have to disagree with your view about the popes "leading you slowly but surely away from worshiping the living Christ". We Catholics worship Christ all the time, most especially during our mass. I am sure Satan wants a lot of things, that doesn't mean he's going to get it. Satan would love for people to fall away from Christ's Church and fall into one deception or another. Satan is a deceiver and liar and unfortunately many do fall into his traps and others willingly run to Satan rather than our Savior Jesus Christ. This is a tragedy beyond all else, as nothing is more important than the eternal souls of people. Jesus does not wish that any should be lost, but he doesn't force us against our will. We come willingly to Him, repenting of our sins and He forgives us and welcomes us to Him with open arms.
Your comments about substitutes for Christ are simply untrue in the Catholic faith. There is no substitute for Jesus Christ and Catholics know it. We don't have a "wafer god". Jesus Christ tells us in John 6:55 that He is truly present in the Eucharist. If that is what you call "the Eucharist God" then so be it. Scripture fully supports the Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist.
John 6:53 "Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him."
And as far as Mary goes, she was indeed a virgin, hence we call her "The Virgin Mary". Even the Reformers believed this to be true. Have you ever read their comments on Mary?
Martin Luther on Mary: 'Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers.' {Pelikan, ibid., v.22:214-15 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539) }
John 6:53 "Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him."
And as far as Mary goes, she was indeed a virgin, hence we call her "The Virgin Mary". Even the Reformers believed this to be true. Have you ever read their comments on Mary?
Martin Luther on Mary: 'Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers.' {Pelikan, ibid., v.22:214-15 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539) }
John Calvin on Mary: 'Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ's 'brothers' are sometimes mentioned.' {Harmony of Matthew, Mark & Luke, sec. 39 (Geneva, 1562), vol. 2 / From Calvin's Commentaries, tr. William Pringle, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1949, p.215; on Matthew 13:55} [On Matt 1:25:]
Huldreich Zwingli on Mary: "To deny that Mary remained 'inviolata' before, during and after the birth of her Son, was to doubt the omnipotence of God" {G. R. Potter, Zwingli, London: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1976, pp.88-9,395 / The Perpetual Virginity of Mary . . ., Sep. 17, 1522}
John Wesley on Mary: 'I believe... he [Jesus Christ] was born of the blessed Virgin, who, as well after as she brought him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin.' {"Letter to a Roman Catholic," quoted in A. C. Coulter, John Wesley, New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, 495}
Huldreich Zwingli on Mary: "To deny that Mary remained 'inviolata' before, during and after the birth of her Son, was to doubt the omnipotence of God" {G. R. Potter, Zwingli, London: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1976, pp.88-9,395 / The Perpetual Virginity of Mary . . ., Sep. 17, 1522}
John Wesley on Mary: 'I believe... he [Jesus Christ] was born of the blessed Virgin, who, as well after as she brought him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin.' {"Letter to a Roman Catholic," quoted in A. C. Coulter, John Wesley, New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, 495}
No comments:
Post a Comment
This is a Catholic blog, please keep your comments respectful to my Faith even when you disagree.
Profanity will not be tolerated - it will be DELETED, so do not waste your time or mine.
Thank you and God bless...
Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner