Re: Transubstantiation/Apocrypha/ A challenge to James White

[beingther]

Ex Cathedra does any one have a list of know whrere i can get one on all the Ex Cathedrathat the pope says

[mysteriumaenigma]

James white writes Catholic hating books because he wants to be rich by selling books. He did not have the brain to be a doctor or Engineer. He got degree from an unaccredited university.

He knows that Catholic bashing books will sell well in Protestant America and it is a easy road to become rich.

[alaya10008]

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 6:27:1 A.D. 110.

[Ferox118]

As for Scripture, try John vi and I Corinthians xi. But really, on what do you base your acceptance of Scripture, for you do not accept the complier of it.

[Ferox118]

I can accept that the books in the Bible were divinely inspired because I accept that the Church, who compiled and canonised the Bible, had the Authority to do so--that same Authority that was given to the Church by Christ (Matt xvi, 18-19) and continues through Apostolic Succession.

However, if you do not accept that the complier of the Bible had Authority, how can you accept the Bible as we know it today? For it it were so, the complier could have erred and hence the Bible could be fallible.

[Ferox118]

Sorry, my second paragraph should read:

However, if you do not accept that the complier of the Bible had Authority, how can you accept the Bible as we know it today? For if such were so, the complier could have erred and hence the Bible could be fallible.

[Juice777222333]

To make it clear, because I know you people can be just as pigheaded and stubborn as any Protestant. I am not asking for clarification about what CHRIST said, but about how you dispense the sacrament. It seems to me that you use Scripture for one argument, and tradition or church teaching for another argument which contradicts your argument based on Scripture. So which is the final authority? Scripture or the church? You cannot have it both ways.

[baldwalrus7]

Neither is the final authority: Christ is the final authority. Since the Church is his Body, his Beloved Bride, she always speaks the truth about Christ. Likewise, because Christ's Spirit inspired Scripture it is always true. Because both come from the same source they never contradict, and both are necessarily true. The Church's authority is derived from the Bible and from Christ, and so is subordinate in that sense, but it also has the right to give the correct interpretation of Scripture.

[NY1054Cool]

@baldwalrus7 Sounds nice but neither the RCC or Eastern Orthodox have given an interpretation of the entire bible. It has made useless it's claimed teaching authority when it fails to provide what it says it has. Saint Jerome was correct on the Old Testament Canon listing . Trent's view on the Apocrypha was unhistorical and very clearly biased at that time.

[Juice777222333]

I have watched EWTN many times when the eucharist is given, and the laity do not drink the wine. I asked a catholic about that, and he said that the church teaches they don't have to drink the wine because there is blood in the flesh. He also called me ignorant and a heretic on the level of John Hus. However, I waited for him to show me a Scripture where JESUS says you don't have to drink the wine because MY Blood is in MY Flesh. JESUS clearly said you must do both.

[deliveringit]

Christ said the spirit gives life while the flesh is of no avail (Jn 6). Tell me, is the spirit of Christ not in the host that once was bread? If not, then you would be eating dead flesh. Or, maybe the spirit of Christ is half in the consecrated bread and half in the consecrated wine? But spirit cannot be split in half like that. No, the full Christ is in either species. In 1Cor11:24, Christ says by eating the bread, we will be commemorating Him. He did not say "half-commemorating Me."

[caydamien02]

hmm.. nothing new under the sun. what do the protestant think about the John 6:45-59? gosh not only they're being historically ignorant but also scriptural ignorant. i waited for a protestant who would define Christ's word as "this is the symbol of my body". what did mr.white would commented on this..?..hmm.. hmm, pax brother. Sancta Mariae ora pro nobis. o yeah im not roman just an old catholic.