Greetings: Gods word is forever. Were living in times of great deception and the reason is people set aside Gods word and follow mortal men. Jesus is the only way and that should be your greatist concern, lest you hear depart from me I never knew you, you workers of iniquity. By faith in jesus we are saved.John 3:16-21. Knowing Gid is different then being a religius person wich will never save you or give rest to your souls.

-- Alex is saved (Jesusislife@Christianemail.com), January 29, 2001

Answers

Knowing God in a relationship is different then someone who trust in their religious activities. There is none rightoues no one. Jesus saves

-- Alex is saved (Jesusislife@Christianemail.com), January 29, 2001.

There is none rightoues no one, except Alex, of course. Leo

-- Leonardo Gomez (leoomezz@USA.NET), January 30, 2001.

Leo needs EYES to see and EARS to hear.

Alex, I love how you love JESUS!

May God's blessings surround you! In Jesus awesome, powerful name. Amen.

Susan

-- SSM (non-catholic follower of Jesus Christ) (heartwjesus@yahoo.com), January 30, 2001.

...and Alex needs a spell-checker.

In Jezus nam wee... In Jezus nam... In Jezus... *Geez*

(:raig

-- Craig Miller (CMiller@ssd.com), January 30, 2001.

Craig,.. you need a life! (smile)

-- Dr. TaiChi (hpuxor@yahoo.com), January 30, 2001.

Save , saved , sssssssssssssssssaaaaved , I'm so sick and tied of hearing about the term SAVED. Who cares ! Saving is the job of the savior, not me or you. There is nothing we can do to save ourselves . Its not our purpose in life . (to be saved) That's up to God who He saves . Granted I want to go to heaven . To be with a God I've come to know for his love of me . My Lord Jesus the Christ, who has paid the price , death on a cross so that I may live. What love of me He has. The more I come to know Him , the more I wish to be with Him, and love Him , spend time with Him , laugh with Him , enjoy with Him . The fact that I know He is the Christ is not saving , for satin himself knows this much. To love God so much that we are not concerned about Heaven or Hell is where to stand . If my God whom I've come to know through the Eucharist decides to condemn me to death in hell . So be it. God only knows I deserve it, for all the times I've offended Him . (I'm sorry Lord). I am willing to give up heaven to follow the will of the Son who died for me. I would be willing to try my best to follow His laws, love my brothers and sisters as He loves them . To hand my life over to Him , to do as he pleases. I trust Him. After all he died for us. It's not about Heaven. Its not about being SAVED. Its about loving Him you are with, now, and forever. He is present , body ,blood , soul, and divinity in the Eucharist. He is with me . Though I walk in the valley of darkness ........sorry I was focused on Him and did not notice the darkness. The grace of the Sacraments are bad for that. (missed out on penance) I am not worthy of heaven but perhaps I'll end up in hell. There is not much a man can do for a God he loves while in hell , so I think I'll go do something today instead while I'm still here on earth, and have the chance. Gosh I'll miss Him if I end up in hell .

-- David Amell (damell@usa.net), January 30, 2001.

I am reminded of a story. There was a monk walking through town with a torch and a bucket of water. Someone asked him why he was doing this. He replied, "the water is to extinguish the fires of Hell and the torch is to burn down the palaces of Heaven. And then we'll see who TRULY loves God."

aaaaaaaa aaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa

-- anthony (fides_spes_et_caritas@hotmail.com), January 30, 2001.

David Amell is a mystic; and I have also been accused of that (among many less positive things). I am immensely gratified that David loves Our Lord in His Eucharistic Presence; as I've been priveleged to.

I think I can rationalise the seeming indifference he describes, as to his personal salvation. If it is like mine (remember I'm a sinner, and I haven't denied it) let's say that, during Holy Communion with the Son of God, I feel myself ''immolated''; unable to care for life or death; intent only on Him. He is immolated for us, on the cross; and love demands love in return. Take heart, David. You won't be in hell after this life. Jesus doesn't go there at all; and He wants your love for all eternity!
Mary Immaculate-- Pray for us! Dear Saint James, help your forum disciples; pray for us! Amen.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), January 30, 2001.

Eugene:

It is obvious to me that David is overcome with the Holy Spirit! This is as close to legible tongues as I have ever seen! I think he is saying he loves His God and doesn't count the cost! If his God deems it necessary to damn him for eternity, he can live with that for it has come from the God he has given His life over to! He is placing all his trust in Him! He has reached the level many of us strive for, "total abandonement in the Eucharist!" His faith is strong indeed!

Ed

-- (grader@accglobal.net), January 30, 2001.

Well, that doesn't make any sense at all to me. I never, never want to be separated from my Heavenly Father.

Give me strength and patience, oh God, that I may be as loving , gentle and patient with others as you have been with me. Through Jesus my Lord and hero I pray. Amen.

-- SSM (non-catholic follower of Jesus Christ) (heartwjesus@yahoo.com), January 30, 2001.

Susan:

Jesus didn't want to be separted from the Father either, but He obeyed Him, and so, the rest as they say is history. He didn't think of Himself, he thought of us! After all, He was the ultimate Christian!

Ed

-- Ed Lauzon (grader@accglobal.net), January 31, 2001.

The Apostles' Creed continues to be used as the baptismal profession of faith in most Western churches; Orthodox churches prefer to use the later Nicene Creed. In Roman Catholic practice, the Apostles' Creed is also recited in the daily office, before the first and after the last service each day. In most Protestant churches, it is used periodically at Sunday worship. Anglicans and Lutherans use it regularly in morning and evening prayer (matins and evensong).

I believe in God, the Father almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord. He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended to the dead. On the third day he rose again. He ascended into Heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.

-- Alberto Ponce (sabueso2@usa.net), February 03, 2001.

-- Alberto Ponce (sabueso2@usa.net), February 03, 2001.

ED,

First I'd like to tell David Arnell that I love how you love Jesus. But, Salvation is a free gift (for those who accept it) the price was paid by JESUS. You don't have to pay for it, He already PAID THE PRICE.

The Eucharist: the Catholic church teaches Jesus Himself, taught transubstantiation. It uses two main passages of Scripture:

John 6:54-55 " He who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood has eternal life; and I will raise him up on the last day. For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink." Catholics are taught here, that Jesus is explaining how He is literally offering them His flesh and blood, so they may have eternal life by physically eating Him. With just a little study of the whole passage(vs.27-71), it is clear that Jesus was not talking about physical, but spiritual food and drink.

Food is eaten to satisfy hunger. And in verse 35 Jesus says, "He who cometh to Me shall never hunger". Now, Jesus is not promising eternal relief from physical hunger pains. He is, of course, speaking of the spiritual hunger in man for righteousness and salvation. and He promises to those who will " come to Him " that He will satisfy their hunger for these things forever therefore, to come to Him is to "eat"! (see also Matthew 5:6, 11:28, John 4:31-34)

We drink also to satisfy thirst, and again in verse 35 Jesus tells us, He that believeth on Me shall never thirst. "Therefore to believe on Him is to "drink"!(see also John 4: 13-14) No one can say that here Jesus was establishing the eating and the drinking of His literal flesh and blood to give eternal life, for in verse 63 He says, "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. " Thus Jesus makes clear what we should be eating and drinking to have eternal life.(see also Matt.4:4.)

Matthew 26:26 & 28: " This is My body...this is My blood." the Catholic church bases it's whole religious system on its interpretation of these two verses. They adamantly teach that right here, Jesus is pronouncing the first priestly blessing that mysteriously changes the bread and wine into His body and blood. The absolute folly of such a conclusion is proved by this one observation: He was literally still there before, during, and after they had partaken of the bread and the cup! He was not changed into some liquid and bread His flesh was still on His bones, and His blood was still in His veins. He had not vanished away to reappear in the form of a piece of bread or a cup of wine!

Look closer at His words. No one can deny here we have figurative language. Jesus did not say -touto gignetai- ("this has become" or " is turned into"), but- touto esti-(" this signifies, represents" or stands for")(the New Testament was written in Greek). It is obvious that Jesus' meaning was not literal but symbolic! And He wasn't the first in the Bible to claim figuratively that a glass of liquid was really "blood".

One time, David's friends heard him express a strong desire for water from the well of Bethlehem. In spite of extreme danger, these men broke through the enemy lines of the Philistines and brought the water to him. When David found out that these men had risked their lives in this way, he refused to drink the water, exclaiming, " Is not this the blood of the men who went in jeopardy of their lives?"(2Sam.23:17).

Throughout the gospels we find similar metaphorical language: Jesus referring to Himself as "the Door", "the Vine","the Light","the Root", "the Rock", "the Bright and Morning Star", as well as " the Bread". The passage is written with such common language that it is plain to any observant reader that the Lord's Supper was intended primarily as a memorial and in no sense a literal sacrifice. "Do this in remembrance of Me" (Luke 22:19).

Father God, You are the One true Holy God, the God who created heaven and earth. I trust You and I rely on Your promises.As a believer, Your born again child,I take the authority that our Lord Jesus Christ has given us over all the power of the enemy. I thank You God for that authority and in that authority, I bind the power of Satan in this forum. In the name of Jesus Christ, the King of King and the Lord of Lords, that this forum be made free of the enemy.Amen.

-- SSM (non-catholic follower of Jesus Christ) (heartwjesus@yahoo.com), February 03, 2001.

Suasan, Susan!,
In all those 2,000 years did it not occur to you maybe the Catholic Church answered that objection?

Even if-- Jesus' own human presence at the Last Supper had ''disappeared'', to reappear in the sacramental species (bread/wine); a problem of how He can be present in as many as a million separate hosts throughout the world at one time-- each and every Holy Mass-- is a much greater challenge to our meager understanding! Yet, He is able to do anything-- He is God!

The entire cosmos is at His Divine command; and you presume to question the words that come from His own lips? With ''just a little study?'' Your arrogance knows no bounds. The problem you think you pose is merely one of ''extension''.

Matter as you and I know and understand it is obedient to God's supreme command. He can order it to be enclosed in a simple molecule, or extended in whatever form and appearance He wills. It obeys-- because God has the power to give existence to something that never even existed! Such as you, such as me!

Don't pretend to gainsay what Jesus Christ meant at His Last Supper. The Catholic Church didn't invent a theory for anybody. The Church heard His words and believed! Susan, it's something we call FAITH!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), February 03, 2001.

Eugeneous,

Did you not notice that I was responding to ED. NOT YOU>). I don't appreciate how you mangled my name either.:>)

Are you aware that Transubstantiation was first practiced by pagan religions? The noted historian Durant said that belief in transubstatiation as practiced by priests of the Roman Catholic system is "one of the oldest ceremonies of primative religion"(The Story of Civilization,p.741.)The mysticism and syncretism of the Middle East were great factors in influencing the West, particularly Italy.(Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius, by Dill.)In Egypt, priests would consecrate meat cakes which were supposed to become the flesh of Osiris!(an ancient Egyptian god of the lower world and judge of the dead- Encyclopedia of Religions,vol.2 p.76) The idea of transubstantiation was also characteristic of the religion of Mithra whose sacraments of cakes and haoma drink closely parallel Catholic Eucharistic rites.(Ibid.)

The idea of eating the flesh of diety was most popular among the people of Mexico and Central America long before they ever heard of Christ; and when Spanish missionaries first landed in those countries, "their surpass was heightened, when they witnessed a religious rite which reminded them of communion... an image made of flour... and after consecration by priests, was distributed among the people who ate it... declaring it was the flesh of deity.

Are you aware of this? I am astounded.

Lord please draw my family to You. In Jesus name.Amen

-- SSM (non-catholic follower of Jesus Christ) (heartwjesus@yahoo.com), February 04, 2001.

I was aware of your anti-Catholicism, Susan. It isn't at all necessary for you to come quoting one of modern history's most atheistic and anti-clerical ''authorities'', Will Durant. Why don't you reach down into that bag and pull out some Marx and Lenin?

I was of the impression you believed in an ''opiate of the masses.'' But now you are in bed with atheists?

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), February 04, 2001.

SSM,

Are you aware there are primitive religions that DON'T believe in Transubstantiation? Surely that means that the God YOU believe in is false. Right?

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), February 04, 2001.

Susan:

So nice to “speak” with you again. I enjoy dialoguing with you for you treat all people with respect although sometimes I do think you come down on Eugene too hard. Please don’t be down on him for messing up your name. It appears to be a typo and I’m sure it was not intentional. It happens to the best of us. In fact Susan, I regret to inform you, it has happened to you. In the very same post you have admonished Eugene for getting your name wrong, you yourself have misspelled David’s name. For the record his name is “A-m-ell” not “A- r-nell”. So you see, even the best of us are not always at the top of our game. Eugene, I am sure you can expect Susan’s apology in the mail shortly!

The second point I would like to address before getting into the meat of your argument is your comment that your post was addressed to me and not for Eugene’s eyes. This sort of comment has come up before, not necessarily with you, but with others, and I have always wanted to address it. It is obvious, by posting your comment with this forum that although addressed to me, you wanted everyone to read it. You were making a statement. Susan, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. You cannot post something in a public forum and make rules that don’t allow the public to respond. When you post, in this forum anyway, you invite commentary, both for and against. This forum is a public one, and I for one, feel I have the right to respond to anything posted if I so desire. The fact that a post is addressed to an individual other than myself will not deter me. If you had wanted to converse with me only, you could have e-mailed me privately and given me your opinion, but you didn't do that, did you?

Now, Susan, let’s discuss the origin of your argument firstly, to determine its validity. You are aware of course, other than for a small number of heretical sects, the notion that Jesus was speaking in “symbolic” terms when referring to His flesh and blood, only gained popularity in the middle ages. This in itself, should raise a flag for anyone who is alert and questioning both sides of this issue. Why would our ancestors, (yours and mine), the early Christians, believe in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist (Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity) for fifteen hundred years? Why would ALL those who were there with Jesus and who moved forward in His Church after His death, make such claims that now seem so preposterous to you? Was all of Christianity misinterpreting Jesus’ words for fifteen hundred years until God was able to send us a new “prophet” in the form of Martin Luther? Luther by the way, as a Catholic monk, also believed in the Real Presence, until it became inconvenient for him while disassociating himself from the Church. To understand this question better, we must also ask ourselves, what other things did Luther do that has affected the discussion that you and I are having at the present. Well, from history, we know that Luther took it upon himself to remove seven Books from Holy Scripture! It seems all Christians to this point had been misinterpreting Scripture for fifteen hundred years as well. I know it appears I am getting off topic but I am merely pointing out the foundation on which you base your arguments is not very solid. I pointing out the credibility of those who originally put forth your hyposthesis. It is quite evident that if you propose a “new” interpretation of God’s word, you have to establish a difference with what is in existence currently. So what would you do to get attention quickly? What Luther did was to adopt an interpretation of Scripture known as “sola scriptura” whereby God’s Holy Word is taken literally and nothing else matters for purposes of salvation. The first thing to go then, obviously, was the Holy Eucharist for Luther knew this is the foundation of the Church Jesus established. Who would be more apt to understand what Jesus meant, Luther (fifteen hundred years after Jesus) or the Apostles who lived with Jesus? Faith is an integrity, you take it all or you take nothing! It’s absolute! You cannot pick and chose what you like about your faith. The Truth is the Truth! It’s like being pregnant. A woman is pregnant or she is not pregnant, but she cannot be half pregnant!

Baptism brings us into the Church, baptism results in our being made part of the mystical body of Christ, but we all remain infant Christians without the Eucharist. Pope John Paul II says the Eucharist is the “source and summit of our Christian life!” Emmanuel - “God among us”! Christianity without the Eucharist is not authentic Christianity. That is not the Church God founded.

In an earlier post John explained our Catholic position on the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. While his presentation was excellent, I will try to say it another way so that hopefully, more readers will come to understand why, for 2000 years, Catholics have believed that Jesus is with us, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

The first announcement of the Eucharist by Jesus divided His disciples, just as the announcement of the Passion scandalized them. Jesus was known to admonish his disciples when they misinterpreted His words. He was known to grow impatient with them when they failed to grasp the meaning He was intending. He wasn’t shy about setting them straight when they were in error. However, at the Bread of Life discourse in John’s gospel we see that after Jesus had mentioned His body was real food and real drink, the disciples said, “this is a hard saying” (John 6:60) and many left. Jesus did not say, “Oh, wait a minute, don’t leave, you’ve completely misunderstood what I was saying, I was speaking in symbolic terms only!” No, He didn’t say that, what He said to those who remained was, “Will you also go away?” (John 6:67) In other words, “I am telling you the Truth!” It has been clear for two thousand years, for anyone who has eyes to see and no other agendas, exactly what Jesus was talking about.

The Eucharist is the paschal banquet, it is Calvary brought forth into our present time and space. We don’t re-enact Calvary, we enter into it, we don’t repeat it, we are there, two thousand years ago, on the Cross with Jesus. We enter into the saving power of God! It’s not another sacrifice, it’s the same sacrifice which we enter into and make present. “Unless you eat my body and drink my blood, you have no life in you!” Jesus again reaffirmed these words when He said, “You abide in Me so that I might abide in you, as I abide in the Father and the Father abides in me.” When you eat normal food you assimilate it, but when you eat the Bread from Heaven, it assimilates you! “By the mystery of this water and wine may we come to share in the divinity of Christ who humbled Himself to share in our humanity” Catholics recognize these words as Truth itself.

But yet, many find it hard to believe. It looks like bread! It tastes like bread! Am I supposed to believe that this piece of bread is Jesus? How do you understand it? Let me set you mind at ease right now! You can’t! The greatest minds in the history of the Church couldn’t explain it! It’s a mystery! But they believed it! We believe it! We don’t walk by sight, the Bible tells us we walk by faith. We walk by that which Jesus has given us, the Holy Eucharist and when we do, we partake in the paschal mystery in a transcendent way in which we are all united in the Body of Christ.

Susan, the Paschal mystery will continue to mystify and no doubt divide, until the end of time. All I can tell you is that to accept the mystery of the Eucharist if to accept God’s complete message found in His Holy Word. I thank you for your prayers for the forum. I too will continue to pray for all who visit here, that they may be enlightened to the full message of God!

St. James and Mary, Our Mother of the heavenly hosts, pray for us!

Ed

-- Ed Lauzon (grader@accglobal.net), February 04, 2001.

Jmj

Since we don't want any lawsuits for plagiarism brought against the forum, I thought that I should mention what Susan forgot to say. She failed to mention that she lifted from two Internet sites almost all that she left here in her February 3rd and 4th (com)posts.

Most of her first post (the one that says Jesus was speaking figuratively about his "body" and "blood") came from one of a series of tracts [the "Catholic Chronicles"] by a now deceased anti-Catholic evangelical, Keith Green.

Most of her second post (the one mentioning Durant) came from one of the most vile, anti-Catholic sites on the Internet, that of "Mission to Catholics International." I have known for more than ten years of MtCI's founder, ex-Father Bartholomew Brewer (former Carmelite priest). What he has to say and the way he says it borders on the most disgusting I have ever heard in my life. (I listened to him speak for an hour or two on a set of tapes wherein he debated a famous Catholic apologist.) The ludicrous statements he makes about Catholicism told me that he must have attended the worst seminary on the face of the earth -- or that he is a victim of total amnesia. He knows next to nothing about our doctrine -- but he used to celebrate Mass! It is totally amazing. This old man now makes it his life's work (i.e., mischief) to draw good Catholics into heresy. [I wonder if Susan's son is working for him -- or if Bart Brewer is the infallible svengali who is holding Susan under his spell.]

It was clear to me that Susan was not speaking from her own mind and heart in these two posts. First, she had never previously posted anything that purported to have substantive arguments. Second, when she would quote from the Bible in the past, it was from a "modern English" version, not the older version that was present in these two posts. Third, I can't quite picture Susan quoting Greek, as she just did.

In the past, when faced with Catholic truth and apologetics in posts from Ed, Eugene, and others, she has been unable to refute them and she has been unable to defend the Protestant doctrines that she wants to believe. This must have left her with an uneasy feeling. So I guess that she went looking for a crutch, but found only some brittle little twigs in Messrs. Green and Brewer. [I believe that she is disqualifying herself as a visitor here -- according to the Moderator's rules -- by posting Jack-Chick-style hate literature.]

Well, anyway, you can see the sources of what Susan copied-and-pasted on this page and on this page.

St. James, pray for us.
O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to you.
God bless you.
John


-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), February 04, 2001.

David Amell, sorry I misspelled your name. It was totally unintentional.

Eugeneous,( Eugene is a genius on a radio show called, "Adventures in Odyssey". His nickname is Eugeneious.)

I was kiddin' around :>) when I mentioned messing up my name. But my dear fellow, I don't like the reference to being "in bed with atheists). That was truly uncalled for. Will Durant was raised in the Catholic religion, all the way through College. And entered seminary at Seton Hall in 1909. He withdrew later.

Have you read any of Lee Strobel's writing? He's a former atheist. I'm currently reading "The Case For Christ" it's fantabulous!

-- SSM (non-catholic follower of Jesus Christ) (heartwjesus@yahoo.com), February 04, 2001.

Now I think I know who ''Some Person'' is. A nice touch, Susan.

You can call me anything you wish. I am not here on an ego trip, and my name isn't sacred. And at least it isn't a pseudonym. My e-mail is real, too. I don't hide; if you wish to meet me some day, let me know.

I received the Body and Blood of My Divine Saviour this evening. Holy Mass!

Dearest Susan: you once described laying on the floor, all rapt and shivering in an ecstatic union with Jesus! --The sweetest time of your whole life!

OK-- Perhaps, why not? I'm glad for you, if it was. I have that meeting with Him every time I partake in Holy Communion; and so do all other good Catholics! Mass and Communion are the norm. Jesus is always here in His Church, whenever we want Him. His love is constant and ever-present.

Too bad that when you were in the Church this escaped your notice. Is it all in the past, now? What happened? A divorce? Bad influences? Don't tell us it was reading the Bible; all Catholics have the Bible. Wouldn't you like to confess? Do it, Susan! Once and for all!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), February 04, 2001.

I am appalled at what John has just told us here about Susan. Susan you should be ashamed of yourself. For your penance I would like you to say three “Hail Mary’s”. It might just be me, but I sense something different in Susan’s writings and actions from the others who visit here. Usually, when Catholics leave the Church they have been hurt deeply by someone in the Church or have not obtained answers to very serious questions they have asked about their faith. Invariably they start attending other services to “broaden” their perspective of God and salvation and all to frequently they run into some slick-talking evangelist who hasn’t read the entire Bible from cover to cover let alone studied about what other treasures God gave us. The initial rush they receive from a charismatic speaker carries them for awhile, and if he is really talented at his profession, he can hold them for a time. However, invariably, his charm wanes, empty words don’t work any longer and the individual who is searching for Truth moves on to the next “slick talker” with a theory. With each new theory they become more and more confused until finally they begin using other peoples arguments when visiting this forum with the half hope of having them discredited for what they really are: mindless, baseless rhetoric designed to steal people away from the faith. I believe there is something common in all of them. I believe there is an honest desire to return to that faith, the Catholic faith, which made them the happiest at one point in their lives.

Whenever ex-Catholics visit the forum there is always a different slant to their comments. Aside form the hurt, which is always so prevalent, implied in much of their writing is this question, “where are the answers, I’ve been searching for some time now, but haven’t found them?” Invariably too, they have been to three or four churches in search of answers. There is a need for Truth. They are looking for the answers in the same we all have. I know in my case, I was fortunate and had loving nuns to teach me my faith and when I couldn’t find the answers to a question, they showed me where and how to find it. I was very lucky; but many in this room were not, as evidenced by the need for knowledge they display in their writings.

Call me gullible or naive but I have just read someone’s post about how many hundreds of people visit this forum daily and if the Lord can bring just one “receptive soul each day" then it’s all worth it. Susan, as far as I am concerned, you or anyone else are always welcome here provided you are interested in “honest” dialogue and “in your own words”. I don’t have the time to respond to all the posts I would like to, let alone search the Internet to see if all questions are genuine and legitimate and have not been taken from some other Internet site. Tell us what YOU think, tell us what YOU feel, tell us what answers YOU need. Please don’t waste our time with someone else’s work you discovered elsewhere. If you are honest with us we promise to try and find the answers for you. You surely do not visit this forum to share your truth with us for your truth has never held up in the numerous times you have been here, especially those posts where you have used someone else thoughts and words. Doesn’t this tell you something about your brand of Christianity? Doesn’t this give you a hint about which direction you should be going? The Holy Spirit could be knocking you over the head with His knowledge and you are too busy “cutting and pasting” to be listening. Stop for a moment and listen.

St. James and Mary, the Mother of God, pray for us!

Ed

-- Ed Lauzon (grader@accglobal.net), February 05, 2001.

Jmj

Hello, folks.
I wish to touch on two things tonight.

I. Something made me re-read what I posted 24 hours ago -- about the things Susan copied. I would not withdraw my criticism of her action or of the misleading materials she copied, but this time I have to criticize myself for presenting the facts in a sort of sneering, uncharitable manner. I apologize to all, especially to Susan for doing that.

II. The other thing I wanted to mention was this ... Ed stated: "Usually, when Catholics leave the Church they have been hurt deeply by someone in the Church or have not obtained answers to very serious questions they have asked about their faith."

My friend, there is no doubt that those are two of the reasons that Catholics leave the Church, but there are enough other reasons for which people slip into heresy that I am not comfortable speaking of anything as "usual" reasons.
I have heard at least one famous apologist opine that the single biggest reason for departure from the Church is "doctrine." Most of those cases seem to involve a person who is poorly educated in his faith and who repeatedly hears false doctrine on TV or radio (or reads it in books or tracts). The false doctrine is all too often presented in ways that ridicule (or lie about) Catholicism, making it seem that our faith is anti-Biblical. Then the person gives in to his/her doubts without even seeking a solid Catholic rebuttal.

My own suspicion is that the two biggest reasons for departure from the Church are moral ones: (a) desire to "remarry" after divorce, without seeking a tribunal's Decree of Nullity; and (b) desire to use contraception with "personal autonomy" and "without a guilt trip." I believe that many people leave for these bad reasons, but, knowing in their "heart of hearts" that they have thereby done wrong, they search for something to use as a "better excuse." Thus when they "learn" that Catholic doctrine is "false," that becomes an easy way for them to mask and repress their uneasiness over sinning against the sixth commandment.

St. James, pray for us.
O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.
God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), February 05, 2001.

Eugene C. Chavez,

My e-mail address is real. And I would love to meet you in person. But I doubt that you live in Nebraska. I am not "Some person". I've been posting here since July or Aug. 2000. And I'm surprised that you don't know me at least a little.

You can tell Mr. Gecik for me that he is wrong again:>) My information came strictly from "The Catholic Chronicles". The author, Keith Green, belongs to Jesus..completely.. I trust his heart for Jesus. Read his biography.( also, I did not cut and paste any of it.)

A friend of mine suggested that I read "The Catholic Chronicles". So I did . The same day that I posted what I was truly surprised about. As a child, growing up in the Catholic religion, I always thought of Communion as the Spiritual Body and Blood of Jesus. Not actually Jesus.

Eugene, you and Mr. Gecik have wounded my spirit so many times. I took a chance and shared my story with you, but you both took my heart and squashed it under your heels. But I kept coming back because God wants me here. He is calling someone here closer to him. That person will feel the Holy Spirit convicting him.

I love you all . I know you will slam me some more. So..have at it.

" I lift my eyes to the hills, where does my help come from, My help comes from the Lord, the maker of heaven and earth. He will not let your feet slip, He who watches over you will not slumber..Psalm 121:1- 4 Oh God, YOU are my God, no one else will take your place. Not the approval of man, Nothing. I love You Jesus! Amen.

-- SSM (non-catholic follower of Jesus Christ) (heartwjesus@yahoo.com), February 05, 2001.

Thank you for the love, Susan. If you feel trampled on, it's your own fault, though. You insist on interfering (even when it doesn't concern you--) and posing ''better alternatives'' to any words by a Catholic here. Myself included. In your vain-glorious posturing is always the subtle intention of raining on the Catholic Parade. Which I admit, is your right. Just go ahead, keep it up! But don't plead innocence, and play the victim. Act like a truly motivated Christian, not like Patty Perfect --

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), February 05, 2001.

+

P.S.

Susan,
--There are no ''spiritual bodies''; that is a contradiction in terms. What else did you believe that is mistaken?

Ciao,
Your friend in Christ,

Gene

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), February 05, 2001.

Jmj

Ah, the saga continues. How sad! Eugene, you are right. Susan's poor spirit is in quite a state, and the worst part is the play-acting that she does in order to generate sympathy. That kind of dissimulation shows an influence of the "Father of Lies." Lord Jesus, help her.

Susan writes: "You can tell Mr. Gecik for me that he is wrong again:>) My information came strictly from 'The Catholic Chronicles'. The author, Keith Green, belongs to Jesus..completely.. I trust his heart for Jesus. Read his biography.( also, I did not cut and paste any of it.)"

We are supposed to read the biography of an anti-Catholic? Chubby chance!
Keith Green was killed in a car crash almost 20 years ago. We hope he "belongs to Jesus completely," but we won't know until we ourselves die.
Eugene, Susan is "in denial." She copied sections of people's writings -- perhaps doing it the hard way, keying it in by hand, rather than using copy-and-paste. By protesting that she did not use copy-and-paste, she shows that she misses the whole point. The important things were not the method she used, but (1) the fact that she made it look like her own work, without giving (dis)credit to the author, and (2) the fact that it was anti-Catholic trash, banned by the Moderator. Susan fails to apologize when faced with those two factual charges.
Finally, I provided links to the Green and Brewer sites. She must not have even taken them! By choosing a phrase from each of Susan's two posts and then doing a quick "FIND" at each linked site, one can see that I was not "wrong." Green and Brewer wrote what Susan copied. [If you look through the pages of the "Catholic Chronicles," you will find that Green quotes from Brewer, sometimes giving him credit in footnotes. I would not be surprised to find that Brewer quotes from Green too. Birds of a feather ...]

Susan stated: "As a child, growing up in the Catholic religion, I always thought of Communion as the Spiritual Body and Blood of Jesus. Not actually Jesus."
If that is what she "thought," then she was not really "growing up in the Catholic religion." She either was not listening (or comprehending) when the truth was explained to her, or she was taught falsely by an ignorant or dissident instructor who did not believe in transubstantiation. Either way, it is a tragedy. Weeks ago, on another thread, I brought this very subject up, after Susan gave a mini-biography -- namely, the fact that she did not have the proper "support system" to help her become and stay a true Catholic. Her family and her teachers let her down.

And that is why I find these new words of Susan so moving and intriguing: "... I kept coming back because God wants me here. He is calling someone here closer to him. That person will feel the Holy Spirit convicting him."
Yes, and "that person" is Susan herself. God is "calling" her "closer to him" through our words about Holy Communion and other subjects.

We are not here to "slam" her, as she fears, but to give her the "tough love" she needs to snap out of the dream world into which she has slipped. Her brand of Jesus-and-me/Sola-scriptura/Once-saved-always-saved "Christianity" is nothing but an addictive drug, and the addiction is hard to break. (She is even so intoxicated by the "drug" as to believe that she has the power to "exorcise" this site.)

Let us not give up praying for her.

Santa Susanna, virgin and martyr, pray for your namesake.
St. James, pray for us.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), February 06, 2001.

Dear John,
If she learned all her backward beliefs in ''My Sunday Visitor'', it still doesn't excuse her. Yes, she's in denial, and hardly one post of hers is more than canned sentiment.

I feel bad, because I'm to the point at which I no longer wish to reply to her. It stirs me up, though, to see her congratulating Israel for his off-the-wall posts. Not in one instance did he post a statement of any substance; only ridicule and shameless babblng, and Susan gives him a high-five! And he wasn't even in agreement with her--he was simply blustering at the Catholic Church. That was what appealed so much to Susan, evidently. ''Thank You, Israel, for your won-derful post!!! Pandering to that pathetic character! Yes, and she's going to ''bind Satan'' for us! Good grief! HA HA!

Message to Susan: Dear Susan, after Satan is bound up by your charms, come back here in the forum, pick a thread and read it. Don't bother to make comments for at least 2 weeks, please. After that, all will be forgiven, OK? You're in Purgatory for the rest of February-- We are giving your opinions up for Lent! Goodby!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), February 06, 2001.

Mr. Gecik, and Mr. Chavez,

You are right about ONE thing. God put me here, partly for me. I learned things about the Catholic religion that I didn't know. But the most important thing I learned is that I don't want any part of it. It is definitely not for me.

I choose Jesus Christ................

I feel very, very sorry for you both. I forgive you and I pray God will forgive you.

(there is NO purgatory)

-- SSM (non-catholic follower of Jesus Christ) (heartwjesus@yahoo.com), February 06, 2001.

Lady Magistro,
You came back like the bad penny? Why do you think you've ''learned'', when you never learn?

You may not believe in a Pugatory; but it doesn't depend on your belief. It depends solely on the Will of God.

Others here also choose Jesus Christ, Susan. Or do you have exclusive rights to Him? The main difference is, we here accept His teachings, given us by His holy apostles. You prefer to ignore the teachings, the apostles and His holy Church. Then you feel sorry for us ? Well. I guess you think if you accept His Church, you can't ''choose'' Jesus. Not very smart, Dear Susan!

Holy Mary, pray for the Church and her children; Saint James, pray for us! Amen.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), February 07, 2001.

He won't bother to answer, but to put his words to rest:

Gods word never mentions Catholic

|

I didn't see the word in God's word. Have you, Alex? I know New Testament is on the cover. But where is Bible? Maybe Bible and Catholic are the same thing!!! Yeah! ALEX JR ! ! ! --Where did that little guy go?

Mother of Jesus Our Saviour-- Holy mary! Pray for us, Amen. James, Glorious Apostle of the Holy Catholic Church, Pray for us!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), February 14, 2001.

Thats why you stick to what is written lest men come along and make all types of human doctrines so will just stick to Gods word wich is all in Gods word.

-- Alex is saved (Jesusislife@Christianemail.com), February 14, 2001.

"Thats why you stick to what is written lest men come along and make all types of human doctrines so will just stick to Gods word wich is all in Gods word." [Alex Ruiz, Jr.]

Well, at least you are right about men coming along and making human doctrines, Junior -- such as the one you yourself have just come along and made.

[Actually, I give you too much credit, Al. You did not make up that human doctrine of "sola scriptura." Father Martin Luther made that one up. You accept that human doctrine from him, but you would reject other things he accepted (e.g., the Real Presence of Jesus in Holy Communion, the fact that Mary was "ever virgin," the baptismal regeneration of infants, etc.).]

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), February 16, 2001.