Name cannot be blank

Nothing of note.

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@TomorrowsWar 1054 would disagree with you on that.

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@swamthetiber25 TBF, modern Catholics do the same thing, disregarding early church fathers instructions and writings. Modern Catholics are just the prototype Protestants.

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@Xtopher_Uzo Incorrect.

Today's Catholic Church began in 1054. Long after the canon was established.

Do you even bother researching some church history before posting?

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@EcciusMaximus And yet only the bread is normally and commonly offered to the Laity in the Latin Rite. You're missing half of the Eucharist.

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@CatholicDrip___ Lead Pastor Victor II began yours.

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@jahel_beck24 Fun fact. The roots of the Rosary are about 700 years older than the Roman Catholic Church

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@RushTheZeppelin @BreeSolstad Maybe so, but a moot point.

Is God omnipresent, sovereign, and over all? So why then do I still give charitably and pray for others? Because he works through others.

Christ commands both not because he is divided or insufficient but he has chosen us to consume both.

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@st_iggy_ @BreeSolstad Guy literally said, "certain people receive only a portion of the sacred body and abstain from the chalice, and since dividing the one mystery cannot happen without sacrilege, they must either receive the sacrament whole or be barred from it entirely."

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@st_iggy_ @BreeSolstad So you think if you went back and told Pope Gelasius I that the one wasn't necessary because it's already present in the bread, he wouldn't excommunicate you?

Look up "Manichaeans vs Pope Gelasius and the Eucharist"

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@st_iggy_ @BreeSolstad So the church was wrong for 1200 years? Because both can't be right.

And how is that reasoning different than from Prots who say it is purely symbolic. Not the result of the reasoning but the manner of the reasoning itself"Christ commands this but I will instead do this bc of x"

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@DianeKamer @BreeSolstad Commands were not optional. It is a requirement.

Reading comprehension is hard friend. There is significant distinction in a requirement and antedoctal "most" and options.

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@DianeKamer @BreeSolstad Tell me you can't dialogue so you insult without telling me.

I went to a Jesuit University, studied Church History and found out it wasn't modern Catholic.

"Most". I'd question that, seems antedoctal. Most Masses for me where not. And the point is it is "optional". Christ ...

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@tom53543 @BreeSolstad The further folks get from the church, the more they cheapen the Eucharist.

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@tom53543 @BreeSolstad Blood was poured out of his body. That's why you need both.

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@st_iggy_ @BreeSolstad Everywhere. Christ commanded not because he is incomplete or unpresent but because we are insufficient. Rome went with some prot like logic in the 1200s to explain away not offering the blood.

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@st_iggy_ @BreeSolstad Incorrect. Don't take my word for it. Research. For 1200 years both the blood and the body were offered to the laity. One early Pope (before Rome's rebellion) even stressed the offering of the wine. Furthermore Christ explicitly commands it.

Christ is present as he is present...

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@ShaneSchaetzel And yet Rome, the prototype Protestant.

Don't like the majestrial authority of the church? Just leave and do your own thing.

[Name cannot be blank @riftenhammer]

@CatholicDrip___ The church long defined those things before 1054