Hentenza said:

How many of those that you copied and pasted in your post actually described an ontological change in the elements?

Click to expand...

If we consider the semantics at play, there is a time during the ceremony where the bread and wine are consecrated. The term consecrate implies the bread and wine is "made sacred" which is the same as saying it ---> "becomes revered as his flesh and his body which was sacrificed" inferring his real actual physical flesh and blood on the cross. I believe the self-sacrificing Love is the Spiritual food and the incarnate quickening Spirit. The consecration lasts for a short time wherein the bread and wine are revered as his flesh and blood, wherein he suffered for our sake.

I believe the judgment at the cup is whether we partake worthily or unworthily. For Paul said, "to eat unworthily is to be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord". I take that to mean we are guilty of crucifying him to save ourselves. For those who plotted to kill him sought to save themselves:

48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.

49 And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all,

50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.


For we know he suffered and died to provide a way for the resurrection so as to justify us, even those who crucified him. And it becomes us to also sacrifice ourselves for him, so as to justify his sacrifice for us. Wherefore Paul said that we are baptized into his death. ---> "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life".

To wit, I believe those who are pure of heart eat and drink his Love in sincere reverence, and they will also pick up their cross and exhibit the same Love, wherefore Jesus says, ---> "if any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me."

Conversely those who are not purified, eat and drink his flesh and blood to save themselves, wherefore Jesus says, "And he that taketh NOT his cross, and followeth after me, is NOT worthy of me." , <---- That is made worthy to follow me.


So, since we must partake of the same cup as the Christ, this is also why I believe Justin martyr said this ---> "...the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus”. <--- The body and blood on the cross ---> baptized into his death ---> newness of life.

A2SG said:

Hey, I suggested something like that a while ago, and was told by many pro-second amendment types that it was a bad idea, unamerican, etc. Glad to see the idea come back, I'd support it.

-- A2SG, see, common ground...was that so difficult?

Click to expand...

It is not a popular opinion. But i believe that just because you have a constitutional right to own guns, it doesnt mean you have the constitutional right to be an irresponsible gun owner without consequences. I am in the camp that believes that to own a gun is to assume a huge responsibility. With that comes heavy accountability. And if someone is unwilling or unable to assume that responsibility/accountability, then they probably shouldn't own a gun lest they are willing to face severe penalties.

DaisyDay said:

Well, you can't take it with you, so give it to me!

How would people giving $15 going to help poor old Donald get into heaven?

Click to expand...

that Stairway is expensive.

narnia59 said:

And how does your family feel about your ministry?

I ask this because the Christian Post (Protestant NOT Catholic) in 2011 published an article titled “Leading and Loving It: Pastors' Wives Overcome Depression”. In the article they report:

1) Eight in 10 pastors' wives say they feel unappreciated or unaccepted by their husbands' congregations
2) 80 percent of pastors’ wives responded that they wish their husbands would choose another profession
3) "Wives' issues" is the No. 1 reason pastors leave their ministries
4) The divorce rate among pastoral couples is similar to that of the general public, around 50 percent.

And they have this very interesting quote by H.B. London, former vice president of church and clergy for Focus on the Family and author of Married to a Pastor -- "The church becomes their husband's mistress, and they in many ways [wives] lose their identity."

If you have not exprienced these issues within your family I would ask that you would at least recognize that you are fortunate, rare, and not the norm. When 80% of Protestant pastors wives wish their husband would leave the ministry, they very much validate St. Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 7:32-35 that "The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please her husband. I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord.

I believe others have pointed out that the discipline of clerical celibacy in the Catholic Church is exactly that, a discipline. It is not doctrine, and can in fact be changed. Catholics simply accept Christ's words when he gave the Church the authority to "bind and loose". So the Church in her wisdom has determined that St. Paul was in fact right, and that a celibate clergy benefits all as they can have an undivided interest in the Lord and his work.

Link to the article:

Leading and Loving It: Pastors' Wives Overcome Depression

Pastors wives are in the spotlight of an entire church and held up as an example for female members Plus, many are partners in their spouses ministries It can leave a woman depressed, lonely and

www.christianpost.com

Click to expand...

I love your post by the way and admire your traditional Catholic piety, my brother.

BibleBeliever1611 said:

Calvinists can brag that they're chosen by God

Click to expand...

People like you brag on their will

narnia59 said:

I believe others have pointed out that the discipline of clerical celibacy in the Catholic Church is exactly that, a discipline. It is not doctrine, and can in fact be changed.

Click to expand...

Indeed, and you have married clergy in the sui juris Eastern Catholic Churches and the Anglican Ordinariates. My understanding is only episcopal continence is mandatory, as that is the case from an Orthodox perspective; I am aware of many unhappy children of bishops in those churches that normally ordain married bishops; and in Eastern Orthodoxy one cannot even be both a bishop and a schemamonk (the most experienced monks and nuns can be tonsured in the Great Schema, the highest degree of Eastern Orthodox monasticism, but this is not available to those consecrated as bishops).

There are, especially in the Assyrian Church of the East and the Syriac Orthodox Church, married chorepiscopi, choir bishops, but they are glorified archpriests of larger cathedrals - this allows them to tonsure readers and altar servers and in the case of the Church of the East to reconsecrate the altar, which under their canon law can be accidentally desecrated by any number of minor liturgical mishaps, for example, if a priest pours oil rather than wine into the chalice by mistake or if his shoe comes off and his bare foot touches the floor of the Apse - fortunately for parishes lacking a chorepiscopi, the Assyrians are required to have something like the Syriac Orthodox tablitho or the Eastern Orthodox antimension on the altar, which is a special kind of corporal, itself another altar, and which can also be used to consecrate the Eucharist away from the church should the need arrive, so parishes of the Church of the East have time to wait for a bishop or chorepiscopi if their altar is accidentally deconsecrated (or intentionally desecrated by Islamist extremists, also a routine occurrence for most of their history, sadly). Chorepsicopi, unlike regular bishops, cannot ordain priests, deacons, or subdeacons or (as far as I am aware) participate in the ordination of other bishops or chorepiscopi as co-consecrators, for they are not suffragan bishops, and they also lack supervisory authority over other presbyters except in their own church or if something like a deanery exists, so the strain on family life caused by the episcopal office is not excessive).

Tropical Wilds said:

Ah, another day, another round of supporting and defending people convicted of crimes related to sec abuse as really “not all that bad.” How nice.

Click to expand...

Not as bad as "crossing an artificial line".

Ah, another day, another round of supporting and defending people convicted of crimes related to sec abuse as really “not all that bad.” How nice.

Brightfame52 said:

Sounds like bragging rights to me

Click to expand...

Calvinists can brag that they're chosen by God

Always in His Presence said:

A national gun registry has been spoken of.

• Second Amendment Rights: Many opponents believe a registry infringes on the right to keep and bear arms by enabling future restrictions or confiscation.

Additionally there are over 500,000,000 million civilian firearms in America. The law abiding will more likely than not - the criminal definitely will not. Sort of like locking the door after the house was robbed.

Click to expand...

The Second Amendment does mention "a well regulated militia" as a reason for its being.

Richard T said:

If someone steals your car and kills someone with it, that is not your fault, though if you left the keys in it you might have a civil cuit.

Click to expand...

If someone steals your car, you report it stolen and turn in your registration. We could have the same thing with guns - if yours gets stolen, report the theft and cancel the registration. If someone is killed before reporting and deregistration, an investigation is warranted for either the car or the gun.

probinson said:

Ridiculous and inane hyperbole aside, I will be interested to see how this affects vaccine uptake.

Florida isn't ending vaccination. They're ending vaccination mandates. I guess the people making these apoplectic predictions must believe that the majority of people are vaccinating their children simply because they MUST. I tend to believe that most people vaccinate their children because they think it's in their best interest to do so, not because they're being forced to do so.

Sure, there are those who refuse vaccines, but that happens now with exemptions for all kinds of reasons. I will be curious to see how the removal of mandates affects vaccine uptake.

Click to expand...

Reduced uptake doesn't have to stem from anti-vax ideologies. Mandates can be useful against more mundane factors like procrastination and forgetfulness. Even for a parent who values vaccines, it can be tricky to schedule them when you're dealing with poor insurance, poor transportation, an overburdened doctor's office, and/or a job with unpredictable or inflexible hours. And when stuff like this is a hassle, it can be easy to put off (and ultimately forget about) without some other force (like a mandate) pushing you to get it done. Heck, I put off my own medical care sometimes just because it's a hassle, and that's despite me having a car and an extremely flexible wfh job.

PloverWing said:

I got a bit lost in this sentence; can you clarify? Is it Common Worship, or the 1928 book, or the 1662 book that contains material offensive to current Anglicans? Can you say in a sentence what material you're referring to? I don't recall seeing anything offensive in Common Worship, but maybe you have one of the older books in mind.

Click to expand...

I was referring to the 1662 book, forgive me. I love Common Worship.

Most Anglicans I am aware of object to one or more aspects of it, variously ranging from the wife pledging to obey the husband in Matrimony to the Black Rubric, the Commination and the Visitation of the Sick. The Deposited Book and the 1928 American book have the virtue of having the presbyter lay hands on the sick and optionally anoint them with oil and pray for them rather than delivering a lecture about how their illness is God’s just punishment for their sins (the Visitation of Prisoners from the 1666 Irish BCP is even worse, insofar as it does not envisage the possibility of one unjustly detained).

Indeed I would say the 1892, 1928 and 1979 American BCP, the 1929 Scottish BCP, the 1938 Melanesian BCP, and the 1928 Deposited Book are my favorite versions, and I also love the Anglican Service Book, a traditional language adaptation of tne 1979 BCP (which comes very close to being my favorite but for a few … minor problems, but the beauty of the 1979 version is that it is in the public domain and the rubrics expressly allow traditional language adaptations of it, and “Rite III“ also provides enough flexibility to celebrate, for instance, the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, which some Episcopal parishes have done, and which I love to see. Conversely, the 1666 Irish Book is my least favorite, since in addition to the Visitation of Prisoners, it also has failed to engender the likable traditional parishes in the UK such as the Temple Church which continue to use the best parts of the 1662 version.

The Liturgist said:

Also far be it from me as a clergyman to correct what an outsider believes….

Click to expand...

It is though a travesty that professed Christians washed by the same blood of Christ are outsiders from your church. I hold the hope that our Lord Jesus will one day rectify this since all saved Christians are going to the same heaven.

Have a blessed day.

NxNW said:

I thought the GOP claimed to be concerned about the lives of children?

Click to expand...

Many people claim things. Following through... not so much.