Do you believe that the communion bread is the actual body of christ?

smokingman

Doc wrote: »

So in order to be Roman Catholic you have to believe every single teaching of the Roman Catholic Church and can not disagree with any. Is this what you are saying?

So how do you explain how different Popes have made changes in the church then?

True it is a fundamental distinction between Protestant and Roman Catholic teaching but that dose not mean you cease to be Roman Catholic if you do not believe it.

Popes love power, they get da money, then they get da bitches!...well, alter boys anyways...

Putting aside the different judeas front/front of judea sects, if the bible itself is taken a la carte (oh I like that bit but not that bit) then you're not a christian. If you want to be a christian, be a bloody christian and make sure you sell your youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. If your friends are on boards.ie on the Sabbath, Exodus 35:2 clearly says you should put them to death. Do you stone farmers for planting different crops side by side and if not, why not? Have you burned your mother alive for wearing garments made from two different threads?

Fake christianity is not "better" than believing in yourself for a change.

Doc

Doc wrote: »

So in order to be Roman Catholic you have to believe every single teaching of the Roman Catholic Church and can not disagree with any. Is this what you are saying?

That's exactly how it works.. How people think they can pick and choose the bits they like is beyond me.

Doc wrote: »

So how do you explain how different Popes have made changes in the church then?

Money. Every hear of indulgences? Read up on it and let me know what you think.

landsleaving

landsleaving wrote: »

Fair enough I suppose, but I actually have quite a bit of respect for someone who calls themselves religious but is willing to be skeptical about some elements of their faith. A critical mind doesn't necessariy preclude spirituality.

Nobody said it did. We are talking about one particular aspect of a religion which many people claim to be a member of and don't believe. They'd be better off in a different denomination.

Christ, a few posts in and we have the ra ra atheists are stupid crowd in already

landsleaving

But... I am an atheist.

biko

Catholics are cannibals, catholics are cannibals, catholics are cannibals!

Seaneh

In answer to the OP.
No.
For the same reason I don't believe that Jesus was an actual vine, with actual leaves.

smokingman wrote: »

Popes love power, they get da money, then they get da bitches!...well, alter boys anyways...

Putting aside the different judeas front/front of judea sects, if the bible itself is taken a la carte (oh I like that bit but not that bit) then you're not a christian. If you want to be a christian, be a bloody christian and make sure you sell your youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. If your friends are on boards.ie on the Sabbath, Exodus 35:2 clearly says you should put them to death. Do you stone farmers for planting different crops side by side and if not, why not? Have you burned your mother alive for wearing garments made from two different threads?

Fake christianity is not "better" than believing in yourself for a change.

What, exactly, do Judaic laws have to do with Christianity?

It's all well and good reading that "letter to Dr. Laura" or whatever other tripe you git your (bad) argument from, but you don't actually have a clue what you are talking about.

Joey the lips

There should be a ban on daft posters posting daft threads under 100 posts and a slap for those over 100.

btw i am not religious...:rolleyes:

cournioni

KurtRussel wrote: »

NOT ANOTHER RELIGION THREAD!!!

Well this isn't really a debate, it's just a straightforward question, with a yes or no answer.

Mine is: NO

Thank you for your time.

By the way if you answer no, you're not a Roman Catholic.

There is something very schizophrenic about this post...

Man I hate religious persecution threads. (And that is what this is. It's "LOOK AT MEEEE I'M THE SUPERIOR ATHEIST" by the back door.

I'm not voting.

Personally I go for the fuzzy fuzzy It's not that simple answer. Do I think the bread becomes a peice of meat? no. Do I know or want to discuss what I think the Bread becomes after the Sacrament? No.

Disgusted this religion bashing thread is being allowed continue.

KurtRussel

I voted yes, just to be a thorn in your atheist smartarse sides. :pac:

KurtRussel wrote: »

Well we have a breed of eejits in Ireland who will tick "Catholic" on the census, then turn around and vote no on this.

As I said, it's just a poll, no need to bash although that would be fun to watch.

Ah I see, you're a census nazi.

Kimono-Girl

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

No but whenever I have to go to a mass I get it anyway because it tastes nice!

me too

i love the taste of the stuff!i tried googling to see if i could make some but alas all i found was i could buy it in.


anybody know how to make communion?

(besides carving up Jesus)

^yes i believe its the body of Jesus

Micky Dolenz

Some Atheist's are so boring.

We should make a deal, I won't go on about my beliefs if you promise not to go on about your lack of beliefs.

newmug

Deleted User wrote: »

Man I hate religious persecution threads. (And that is what this is. It's "LOOK AT MEEEE I'M THE SUPERIOR ATHEIST" by the back door.

I'm not voting.

Personally I go for the fuzzy fuzzy It's not that simple answer. Do I think the bread becomes a peice of meat? no. Do I know or want to discuss what I think the Bread becomes after the Sacrament? No.

Disgusted this religion bashing thread is being allowed continue.

+1,000,000

My answer is YES

where do i go from here wrote: »

I'm a Catholic and i can vote NO!!!

Theres other Catholics apart from Roman Catholics in this country yanno!!:)

Like who?

newmug

newmug wrote: »

+1,000,000

My answer is YES






Like who?

I think anglicans are catholics arent they

I'm tired so I cant figure out if seaslacker is joking around or not :pac:

ebixa82

I could never even attempt to eat it. If it is really is Jesus Christ's body surely it's like a game of Russian roulette and some poor cun.t will end up munching on a piece of his left testicle, scrotum or anus!

PandyAndy

Kimono-Girl wrote: »

me too

i love the taste of the stuff!i tried googling to see if i could make some but alas all i found was i could buy it in.


anybody know how to make communion?

(besides carving up Jesus)

^yes i believe its the body of Jesus

Here you go

http://www.ehow.com/how_2292943_make-communion-bread.html

Go make Jesus!

LisaLee

No, more of a symbolism really, which goes against Catholic teaching. I just don't bother taking Communion anymore.

bluewolf

bluewolf wrote: »

I think anglicans are catholics arent they

I'm tired so I cant figure out if seaslacker is joking around or not :pac:

I'm hugely insulted by the thread's existence, but the OP's just a census nazi, and I'm just going to get on with my life and be damned if I let such a self-righteous such-and-such ("such-and-such" may or may not replace the word "pr*ck") get a rise from me.

baltimore sun

bluewolf wrote: »

I think anglicans are catholics arent they

bahahahahahah :D :rolleyes:

mconigol

Is there not a religion forum on here somewhere?

I'm getting sick of listing to a bunch of hardcore atheists working themselves up into a frenzy about something they supposedly don't even care about.

baltimore sun

baltimore sun wrote: »

bahahahahahah :D :rolleyes:

What's the joke?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglican_Catholic_Church

newmug

bluewolf wrote: »

I think anglicans are catholics arent they

Ah they're not real Catholics, not in the true sense of the word. Catholicism (of the roman variety) is just the original Christianity, all the way back to Jesus's time. The word Catholic came about when protestantism was invented, as a way of distinguishing the two (cos protestants actually see themselves as Christian, the irony!) and I have no idea where the roman part comes into it, apart from the fact that St. Peter spread the religion as far as rome, where he was murdered and buried. It really pi$$es me off when people stick the word roman in there:mad:

newmug

mconigol wrote: »

Is there not a religion forum on here somewhere?

I'm getting sick of listing to a bunch of hardcore atheists working themselves up into a frenzy about something they supposedly don't even care about.

An athiest forum you mean! Yea there is one. Wish they'd keep their insults there.

Canis Lupus

Deleted User wrote: »

Man I hate religious persecution threads. (And that is what this is. It's "LOOK AT MEEEE I'M THE SUPERIOR ATHEIST" by the back door.

I'm not voting.

Personally I go for the fuzzy fuzzy It's not that simple answer. Do I think the bread becomes a peice of meat? no. Do I know or want to discuss what I think the Bread becomes after the Sacrament? No.

Disgusted this religion bashing thread is being allowed continue.

Considering you don't want to talk about it you're posting an awful lot in this thread.

Transubstant...ation (or however it's spelt) is a core piece to catholicism whereby the bread and wine change to the body and blood of Jesus although apparently this change isn't detectable by any means/senses (the theologians must have all heartily patted themselves on the back when they came up with that explanation).

Lots of catholics really don't believe this process and yet call themselves catholics. I think it's worthy enough to chat about.

AnnyHallsal

newmug wrote: »

Ah they're not real Catholics, not in the true sense of the word. Catholicism (of the roman variety) is just the original Christianity, all the way back to Jesus's time. The word Catholic came about when protestantism was invented, as a way of distinguishing the two (cos protestants actually see themselves as Christian, the irony!) and I have no idea where the roman part comes into it, apart from the fact that St. Peter spread the religion as far as rome, where he was murdered and buried. It really pi$$es me off when people stick the word roman in there:mad:

You can be Catholic without being Roman Catholic, if you belong to the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church, or the Assyrian Church of the East.

IamtheWalrus

OP you blasphemer. Now, off to you app store and download the sin forgiver app!

seamus

It's not even bread, never mind Jesus.

If they got a few fresh loaves from Superquinn before mass and chopped them up, I bet you the attendance figures would go through the roof. Even better, bake it fresh in the church; the smell would have people coming from miles around.

Doc wrote: »

So in order to be Roman Catholic you have to believe every single teaching of the Roman Catholic Church and can not disagree with any. Is this what you are saying?

Eh...that's exactly it. There is no distinction between "this stuff you have to believe" and "Ah sure, all this stuff is optional, you can believe it if you want, we don't care".
If it's OK to not agree on some things, then you could logicially extend that to, "I don't believe in Jesus or the resurrection or God or any of that nonsense, but I'm catholic to be sure to be sure".

It's all or nothing. Can you eat meat and call yourself a vegetarian? No, of course you can't. So therefore you cannot support contraception and call yourself a Roman Catholic.

This is the fundamental thing that people seem to be missing. If everyone can pick and choose what parts of Catholicism to believe, then who decides what you can't pick and choose? And if you can pick and choose on some things, but not others, then why does the catholic church talk about the optional things at all? Why not abandon them?

Of course, the made-up titles of "lapsed" or "non-practicing" Catholic are for people who incorrectly believe that Catholicism is part of their cultural identity - that being Irish and being Catholic are in some way inextricably tied and are afraid to admit the truth that they are no longer Roman Catholic lest they feel like they're betraying their heritage and letting Mammy down. I have more respect for someone who calls themself Roman Catholic and sticks to its rules than someone who goes along with the facade of, "Oh I'm Catholic but I only go to Mass on Xmas Eve after rogering my girlfriend seven ways from Sunday with a johnny on my mickey".

I must note that someone who "betrays" the Church's teachings aren't necessarily out of the Church. A Catholic who uses contraception isn't automatically non-Catholic. However, that person must believe that the use of contraception is wrong and repent for their "sins". If they use contraception and disagree with the Catholic Church on it being evil, then they are not Catholic. Simple As.

So how do you explain how different Popes have made changes in the church then?

The Pope is seen as God's representative on earth and therefore is imbued with the righteousness of said God and may make changes to the church and its teaching as he sees fit because the church believes that he is acting on God's behalf, with God's wisdom.

You, on the other hand, are not.

AnnyHallsal

seamus wrote: »

Eh...that's exactly it. There is no distinction between "this stuff you have to believe" and "Ah sure, all this stuff is optional, you can believe it if you want, we don't care".
If it's OK to not agree on some things, then you could logicially extend that to, "I don't believe in Jesus or the resurrection or God or any of that nonsense, but I'm catholic to be sure to be sure".

It's all or nothing. Can you eat meat and call yourself a vegetarian? No, of course you can't. So therefore you cannot support contraception and call yourself a Roman Catholic.

This is the fundamental thing that people seem to be missing. If everyone can pick and choose what parts of Catholicism to believe, then who decides what you can't pick and choose? And if you can pick and choose on some things, but not others, then why does the catholic church talk about the optional things at all? Why not abandon them?

Of course, the made-up title of "lapsed" or "non-practicing" Catholic is for people who incorrectly believe that Catholicism is part of their cultural identity - that being Irish and being Catholic are in some way inextricably tied and are afraid to admit the truth that they are no longer Catholic lest they feel like they're betraying their heritage.

My mother shamelessly describes herself as an "a la carte" Catholic :rolleyes:

the_pits

Eddie Izzard sums it


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCIvmdABBnU

Dave!

lol no

Canis Lupus

mconigol wrote: »

Is there not a religion forum on here somewhere?

I'm getting sick of listing to a bunch of hardcore atheists working themselves up into a frenzy about something they supposedly don't even care about.

Do we mind religion? No per say.

Do we mind the effect religion has on society including those of us who opt out? Yep

And hey if the religious can send missionaries out to convert people I think we should be allowed the same lee way :P You don't want to participate you don't have to

mconigol

newmug wrote: »

An athiest forum you mean! Yea there is one. Wish they'd keep their insults there.

Religion forum, Athiesm forum whichever. I don't care. I'd consider the OP to be a question about religion/catholicism though so religion would be more suitable in my opinion.

Threads seem to get locked in after hours all the time when they're deemed to be off topic. These type seem to be exempt though :rolleyes:

Caoimhín

Ofd course it is.


And im the king of Norway.

mconigol

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Do we mind religion? No per say.

Do we mind the effect religion has on society including those of us who opt out? Yep

And hey if the religious can send missionaries out to convert people I think we should be allowed the same lee way :P You don't want to participate you don't have to

There's a suitable forum here already for the OPs question. It's a very specific question about a specific part of Catholicism so imo it belongs in the religion forum.

Canius Lapus, Go faceplant into concrete.

newmug

AnnyHallsal wrote: »

You can be Catholic without being Roman Catholic, if you belong to the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church, or the Assyrian Church of the East.

Ah not really though. They're all protestants of some sort or other.

seamus wrote: »

Eh...that's exactly it. There is no distinction between "this stuff you have to believe" and "Ah sure, all this stuff is optional, you can believe it if you want, we don't care".
If it's OK to not agree on some things, then you could logicially extend that to, "I don't believe in Jesus or the resurrection or God or any of that nonsense, but I'm catholic to be sure to be sure".

It's all or nothing. Can you eat meat and call yourself a vegetarian? No, of course you can't. So therefore you cannot support contraception and call yourself a Roman Catholic.

This is the fundamental thing that people seem to be missing. If everyone can pick and choose what parts of Catholicism to believe, then who decides what you can't pick and choose? And if you can pick and choose on some things, but not others, then why does the catholic church talk about the optional things at all? Why not abandon them?


I must note that someone who "betrays" the Church's teachings aren't necessarily out of the Church. A Catholic who uses contraception isn't automatically non-Catholic. However, that person must believe that the use of contraception is wrong and repent for their "sins". If they use contraception and disagree with the Catholic Church on it being evil, then they are not Catholic. Simple As.
The Pope is seen as God's representative on earth and therefore is imbued with the righteousness of said God and may make changes to the church and its teaching as he sees fit because the church believes that he is acting on God's behalf, with God's wisdom.

You, on the other hand, are not.

Well summed up. That is why I cannot stand this new breed of athiests who say, "Well I was brought up Catholic, but the paedophiles put me off. But I still believe in being good and not stealing, murdering etc".

GRRRRRR. The bloody paedophiles weren't Catholic in the first place:mad::mad::mad: And how can you hate an organisation for having love and all-things-good at its core, and then turn around and say you believe the exact same stuff, but you just dont believe in God!!! Eh, hello, God and his religion have the monopoly on being good!!!!

And as for the pope being able to change things, thats why Jesus created the office of pope, so that the religion can move with the times - Yet another thing athiests accuse Catholics of not doing:mad:

PandyAndy

Deleted User wrote: »

Canius Lapus, Go faceplant into concrete.

That violence isn't very Christian of you.

grrrrrrrrrr

No, surely it would be brown bread if it was JC since he was an Arab

Canis Lupus

mconigol wrote: »

There's a suitable forum here already for the OPs question. It's a very specific question about a specific part of Catholicism so imo it belongs in the religion forum.

I'd argue that the A&A forum is a pointless place to ask it for obvious reasons and the Christianity forum is for committed Christians which again defeats the question.

Asking in AH allows for people who call themselves roman catholics but don't believe in many aspects of the religion to give their thoughts on their position.

GRRRRRR. The bloody paedophiles weren't Catholic in the first place

Is it no true scotsman time again already

AnnyHallsal

newmug wrote: »

Ah not really though. They're all protestants of some sort or other.

Well, they accept transubstantiation.

The 'Roman' primarily refers to being led by the Pope, I believe.

Canis Lupus

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I'd argue that the A&A forum is a pointless place to ask it for obvious reasons and the Christianity forum is for committed Christians which again defeats the question.

Asking in AH allows for people who call themselves roman catholics but don't believe in many aspects of the religion to give their thoughts on their position.

Religion is NOT welcome in AH. Otherwise all faiths just pile in and we get hamsterwheel after hamsterwheel after hamsterwheel thread and they just end up in hatred posts and bans.

After Hours is not the place for evangelism, by any faith or lack of it. We believe what we believe and After Hours is not for its discussion.

Canis Lupus

newmug wrote: »

Ah not really though. They're all protestants of some sort or other.




Well summed up. That is why I cannot stand this new breed of athiests who say, "Well I was brought up Catholic, but the paedophiles put me off. But I still believe in being good and not stealing, murdering etc".

GRRRRRR. The bloody paedophiles weren't Catholic in the first place:mad::mad::mad: And how can you hate an organisation for having love and all-things-good at its core, and then turn around and say you believe the exact same stuff, but you just dont believe in God!!! Eh, hello, God and his religion have the monopoly on being good!!!!

And as for the pope being able to change things, thats why Jesus created the office of pope, so that the religion can move with the times - Yet another thing athiests accuse Catholics of not doing:mad:

Did he?

Canis Lupus

Deleted User wrote: »

Religion is NOT welcome in AH. Otherwise all faiths just pile in and we get hamsterwheel after hamsterwheel after hamsterwheel thread and they just end up in hatred posts and bans.

After Hours is not the place for evangelism, by any faith or lack of it. We believe what we believe and After Hours is not for its discussion.

From the charter: "After hours consists of the type of chat you have with your mates after a few pints at a lock in".

Seems like this thread passes that requirement.

mconigol

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I'd argue that the A&A forum is a pointless place to ask it for obvious reasons and the Christianity forum is for committed Christians which again defeats the question.

Asking in AH allows for people who call themselves roman catholics but don't believe in many aspects of the religion to give their thoughts on their position.

Except all you get is a load of Richard Dawkins fanboys who are just as blinkered as the religious people they seem to detest hijacking the thread to bitch about the church.

As I said before I've seen so many threads in AH that have been moved or locked fairly rapidly when there's an appropriate forum to discuss the topic or when the thread goes completely off topic.

If I was to start a thread about a specific pub in Dublin it would probably get moved on to the Dublin forum pretty quickly even though I could argue that starting it in after hours gives non-dubliners the chance to give their thoughts on it. Identical argument. Equally pointless.

hask1965

does it really mater if people belive its gods bread or not its up to you to belive what you want and no one should tell you what is or not :eek:

landsleaving

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Do we mind religion? No per say.

Do we mind the effect religion has on society including those of us who opt out? Yep

Then why do these threads always just turn into Catholic/Christian bashing?

I don't agree with a large amount of what Catholics do, but it's not my place to tell them what to believe, nor anyone elses. Question the Church itself, fair enough, but this thread does nothing of the sort, it's basically an excuse to call Catholics stupid for a belief they hold.

So when the hardcore atheists seize power, will I be ironically crucified now?

taintabird

baltimore sun wrote: »

bahahahahahah :D :rolleyes:

What is funny exactly?

newmug wrote: »

Ah they're not real Catholics, not in the true sense of the word. Catholicism (of the roman variety) is just the original Christianity, all the way back to Jesus's time. The word Catholic came about when protestantism was invented, as a way of distinguishing the two (cos protestants actually see themselves as Christian, the irony!) and I have no idea where the roman part comes into it, apart from the fact that St. Peter spread the religion as far as rome, where he was murdered and buried. It really pi$$es me off when people stick the word roman in there:mad:

Elaborate and explain the irony please ?

Canis Lupus

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Did he?

See that?

Soc -> Religion & Spirituality > Christianity

---

>Thisaway!!!

seamus

newmug wrote: »

The bloody paedophiles weren't Catholic in the first place

They could have been/could still be. As I point out above, belief is the key, not actions. At least some of the paedophiles may have believed what they were doing was wrong and repent and hated themselves for it but found themselves unable to control their urges. It doesn't mean they weren't Catholic, they were just very sinful Catholics.

And how can you hate an organisation for having love and all-things-good at its core,

Because in a physical world (as opposed the meta physical) the core belief is less important than actions. To take your paedophiles example, I'm sure many of them have "love and all-things-good" at their core, but it's all the other **** outside of that and their actions outside of that which define their totality.
Similarly the core beliefs of the Catholic Church can be good, but the volume of downright evil acts which have been carried out and covered up with the Church's full knowledge and blessing cannot be written off because "It's good at the core".

Eh, hello, God and his religion have the monopoly on being good!!!!

But that's not true is it? If God and Catholicism had a monopoly on good, then anyone who is not Catholic would be incapable of doing good.