Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Two Byzantine Catholic priests, speaking independently in recent podcasts, identified the same sickness in the Roman Church: too many Catholics treat the parish as a place to obtain the Eucharist and then leave. “Is it valid?” has become the only question, as though right worship, sacred beauty, sound teaching,...

BreeSolstad's profile picture

Bree Solstad

73,242 subscribers

24,053 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

In Your Friends & Neighbors (Apple TV+), two characters break into a Catholic church, steal consecrated Hosts from the tabernacle, mock the Eucharist as “the Body of Christ,” and dip it in jam like a snack, then simulate Communion, followed by a sexual act in the pews with the ciborium on the floor. This is not art. It is sacrilege. The Holy Eucharist is the true Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ. To use it as a prop for blasphemy and perversion is an act of diabolical contempt. Every baptized Catholic should be outraged, not in hatred, but in defense of the sacred. Silence is not an option. We must speak, pray in reparation, and refuse to fund platforms that mock our Lord.
2:52

In Your Friends & Neighbors (Apple TV+), two characters break into a Catholic church, steal consecrated Hosts from the tabernacle, mock the Eucharist as “the Body of Christ,” and dip it in jam like a snack, then simulate Communion, followed by a sexual act in the pews with the ciborium on the floor. This is not art. It is sacrilege. The Holy Eucharist is the true Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ. To use it as a prop for blasphemy and perversion is an act of diabolical contempt. Every baptized Catholic should be outraged, not in hatred, but in defense of the sacred. Silence is not an option. We must speak, pray in reparation, and refuse to fund platforms that mock our Lord.

Patrick Coffin

35,299 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Baptised Catholics who walk away from the true Church often claim they have “seen the light.” But let’s be clear, that is not the light. No failure of a priest. No scandal of a bishop. Not even the weakness of a Pope is ever a justification to abandon the Catholic Church. The truth is this: you don’t leave Christ because of Judas. The Catholic Church is not built on the perfection of men. it is built on Christ Himself and sustained by the Eucharist. Those who truly understand and value the Eucharist do not walk away from it. Call it what it is, not “seeing the light,” but turning away from it. Leaving the Catholic Church is synonymous with turning away from the Light.
0:54

Baptised Catholics who walk away from the true Church often claim they have “seen the light.” But let’s be clear, that is not the light. No failure of a priest. No scandal of a bishop. Not even the weakness of a Pope is ever a justification to abandon the Catholic Church. The truth is this: you don’t leave Christ because of Judas. The Catholic Church is not built on the perfection of men. it is built on Christ Himself and sustained by the Eucharist. Those who truly understand and value the Eucharist do not walk away from it. Call it what it is, not “seeing the light,” but turning away from it. Leaving the Catholic Church is synonymous with turning away from the Light.

Uche is a girl 🇻🇦

111,300 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Protestants seem to fundamentally misunderstand why we want to debate them. We DO NOT grant that we have the same faith. For us, the Eucharist is our Salvation. We worship the Eucharist. We would give up everything in our life if it means we still have the Eucharist. Does this sound like the same faith as Cliffe? Does this sound like a tertiary issue? No. And this is why these debates MATTER
0:31

Protestants seem to fundamentally misunderstand why we want to debate them. We DO NOT grant that we have the same faith. For us, the Eucharist is our Salvation. We worship the Eucharist. We would give up everything in our life if it means we still have the Eucharist. Does this sound like the same faith as Cliffe? Does this sound like a tertiary issue? No. And this is why these debates MATTER

Benjamin Michael

44,360 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

The Eucharist is the real Body of Christ. Not a symbol. John 6:53: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.” Reject Protestant confusion. Come home to the Church. Come home to the Eucharist. Kyrie eleison! Hallelujah!
1:28

The Eucharist is the real Body of Christ. Not a symbol. John 6:53: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.” Reject Protestant confusion. Come home to the Church. Come home to the Eucharist. Kyrie eleison! Hallelujah!

Cedars and Saints🇻🇦

19,236 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

I am bringing this video back as a reminder: We are not Catholics because of the Pope or any priest. We are Catholics because of JESUS CHRIST. Christ is the foundation of our faith. Not personalities. Not emotions. Not convenience. So no, A bad priest is not an excuse. A weak Bishop is not an excuse. A corrupt Pope is not an excuse. A “boring” homily is not an excuse. None of these are reasons to walk away from the Church Christ Himself established. If you are Catholic, be Catholic for the right reason, and that reason is, JESUS CHRIST.
1:45

I am bringing this video back as a reminder: We are not Catholics because of the Pope or any priest. We are Catholics because of JESUS CHRIST. Christ is the foundation of our faith. Not personalities. Not emotions. Not convenience. So no, A bad priest is not an excuse. A weak Bishop is not an excuse. A corrupt Pope is not an excuse. A “boring” homily is not an excuse. None of these are reasons to walk away from the Church Christ Himself established. If you are Catholic, be Catholic for the right reason, and that reason is, JESUS CHRIST.

Uche is a girl 🇻🇦

46,898 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

The Church is not free to change what Christ Himself established. Pope Paul VI stated it with clarity: “The Church holds that it is not admissible to ordain women to the priesthood, for very fundamental reasons. These reasons include: the example recorded in the Sacred Scriptures of Christ choosing his Apostles only from among men; the constant practice of the Church, which has imitated Christ in choosing only men; and her living teaching authority which has consistently held that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is in accordance with God’s plan for his Church.” This is not a matter of cultural preference or temporary discipline. It is a question of the sacramental configuration of the priesthood to Christ the Bridegroom. The priest acts in persona Christi Capitis — in the person of Christ the Head. Christ was a man. He chose only men as Apostles. The Church has never claimed the authority to alter that choice. This does not mean women are of lesser dignity. The greatest human person after Christ is a woman: the Blessed Virgin Mary. She is the highest creature, the Mother of God, the Queen of Heaven, and the perfect model of the Church. No priest, bishop, or pope surpasses her in holiness or importance. The Church has always honored the unique and irreplaceable dignity of women — as mothers, as consecrated virgins, as teachers, as mystics, as the heart of the domestic church, and as the ones who so often carry the faith forward when men fail. Male and female are not interchangeable roles in the order of grace. They are complementary. The priesthood is a fatherly office. The Church herself is maternal. To confuse these is not progress; it is a loss of the very nuptial mystery that runs through all of Scripture — Christ the Bridegroom and the Church His Bride. What the Anglican Communion has done in ordaining women as bishops (and now installing a woman as Archbishop of Canterbury) is a departure from the apostolic tradition that the Catholic Church is bound to safeguard. Pope Francis’s simple “No” in the interview is not harshness. It is fidelity. The Church does not invent her structure. She receives it. And in receiving it, she protects both the fatherhood of the priesthood and the irreplaceable feminine genius that belongs uniquely to women.
0:25

The Church is not free to change what Christ Himself established. Pope Paul VI stated it with clarity: “The Church holds that it is not admissible to ordain women to the priesthood, for very fundamental reasons. These reasons include: the example recorded in the Sacred Scriptures of Christ choosing his Apostles only from among men; the constant practice of the Church, which has imitated Christ in choosing only men; and her living teaching authority which has consistently held that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is in accordance with God’s plan for his Church.” This is not a matter of cultural preference or temporary discipline. It is a question of the sacramental configuration of the priesthood to Christ the Bridegroom. The priest acts in persona Christi Capitis — in the person of Christ the Head. Christ was a man. He chose only men as Apostles. The Church has never claimed the authority to alter that choice. This does not mean women are of lesser dignity. The greatest human person after Christ is a woman: the Blessed Virgin Mary. She is the highest creature, the Mother of God, the Queen of Heaven, and the perfect model of the Church. No priest, bishop, or pope surpasses her in holiness or importance. The Church has always honored the unique and irreplaceable dignity of women — as mothers, as consecrated virgins, as teachers, as mystics, as the heart of the domestic church, and as the ones who so often carry the faith forward when men fail. Male and female are not interchangeable roles in the order of grace. They are complementary. The priesthood is a fatherly office. The Church herself is maternal. To confuse these is not progress; it is a loss of the very nuptial mystery that runs through all of Scripture — Christ the Bridegroom and the Church His Bride. What the Anglican Communion has done in ordaining women as bishops (and now installing a woman as Archbishop of Canterbury) is a departure from the apostolic tradition that the Catholic Church is bound to safeguard. Pope Francis’s simple “No” in the interview is not harshness. It is fidelity. The Church does not invent her structure. She receives it. And in receiving it, she protects both the fatherhood of the priesthood and the irreplaceable feminine genius that belongs uniquely to women.

Holy Sea

26,171 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

The reason we are Catholic and go to Mass is because of Jesus in the Eucharist and not the priest !! 🎥Fr.DavidMoses
0:36

The reason we are Catholic and go to Mass is because of Jesus in the Eucharist and not the priest !! 🎥Fr.DavidMoses

Saint Adaugoijele ✝️

26,749 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

In preparation for this, I checked out Dr. Jordan Cooper's (Dr Jordan B. Cooper) video on Chemnitz's examination of traditions and he made the remark that the Catholic Church contradicts the consensus of the Fathers on communion in both kinds, and that there is "no example of" communion in one kind in the Fathers. Respectfully, I think this is a messy critique which misses what is going on at the Reformation and what the precise claim of the Reformers was. I have already made a video extensively citing examples of communion in one kind starting in the 3rd century, through Tertullian, Ss. Jerome, Basil, etc, such as the widespread practice of private communion at home with the Eucharistic bread only. I will link it below. These are usually dismissed as "extraordinary instances," but this only shows that the Fathers did not actually agree with the Reformers. Remember, the Reformers (specifically the Lutheran orthodox) said that communion in one kind can NEVER happen. Johann Adam Scherzer, for example, said that if someone cannot receive wine, “[he] should be kept away from the whole, than that he should not receive the whole” (Anti-Bellarmine, disp. 11, th. 6, obj. 9). To demonstrate that the Catholic Church "contradicts" the Fathers on communion in both kinds (which is Dr. Cooper's internal critique), one needs to show that the Fathers of any age unanimously (at least morally) taught that it was a matter of faith to hold that both kinds must be received. Certainly, no consensus ever existed. On the contrary, we know they often did make the exception and allowed Christians to receive only one kind, which shows they did not agree with the Lutherans that this is a divine precept (to receive both). Dr. Cooper conflates the ordinary liturgical practice with what Catholics mean by a "consensus on the Fathers." For more, I recommend reading St. Robert Bellarmine who has a really good response to Martin Chemnitz. Here is a helpful example. It was truly a unanimous practice to preserve the Eucharist after the liturgy and treat the elements as consecrated. The Reformed (to my knowledge) unanimously deny this is the case, and the Lutherans (from my reading of Chemnitz and Gerhard) admit that Christ's presence persists but only for taking the Eucharist to the sick. The early Church affirmed Christ's presence in the Eucharist in the Catholic sense; they preserved it even for reasons which were not for the sick and nevertheless affirmed its lasting consecration (Ss. Irenaeus, Ambrose, Jerome, to name a few). The Catholic view of tradition tells us that this practice/belief (that Christ is still present post-liturgy) must be valid and true (since the universal church cannot err), but it does not establish a precept i.e. just because the whole Church often preserved the Eucharist, it does not mean we actually have to do it; it just means we can do so validly and licitly; it also means this is a certain rule which Protestants contradicted (from a Catholic POV). Even if communion in both kinds was the universal practice (which it was not), this would not suffice to say the Tridentine Church is in contradiction, since this would only tell us it is valid (duh, so does Scripture). There would need to be a unanimous testimony from the Fathers of, let's say, the fourth century, that communion in both kinds is the only way and that to oppose this is heresy; a testimony which does not exist and is even contradicted.
0:20

In preparation for this, I checked out Dr. Jordan Cooper's (Dr Jordan B. Cooper) video on Chemnitz's examination of traditions and he made the remark that the Catholic Church contradicts the consensus of the Fathers on communion in both kinds, and that there is "no example of" communion in one kind in the Fathers. Respectfully, I think this is a messy critique which misses what is going on at the Reformation and what the precise claim of the Reformers was. I have already made a video extensively citing examples of communion in one kind starting in the 3rd century, through Tertullian, Ss. Jerome, Basil, etc, such as the widespread practice of private communion at home with the Eucharistic bread only. I will link it below. These are usually dismissed as "extraordinary instances," but this only shows that the Fathers did not actually agree with the Reformers. Remember, the Reformers (specifically the Lutheran orthodox) said that communion in one kind can NEVER happen. Johann Adam Scherzer, for example, said that if someone cannot receive wine, “[he] should be kept away from the whole, than that he should not receive the whole” (Anti-Bellarmine, disp. 11, th. 6, obj. 9). To demonstrate that the Catholic Church "contradicts" the Fathers on communion in both kinds (which is Dr. Cooper's internal critique), one needs to show that the Fathers of any age unanimously (at least morally) taught that it was a matter of faith to hold that both kinds must be received. Certainly, no consensus ever existed. On the contrary, we know they often did make the exception and allowed Christians to receive only one kind, which shows they did not agree with the Lutherans that this is a divine precept (to receive both). Dr. Cooper conflates the ordinary liturgical practice with what Catholics mean by a "consensus on the Fathers." For more, I recommend reading St. Robert Bellarmine who has a really good response to Martin Chemnitz. Here is a helpful example. It was truly a unanimous practice to preserve the Eucharist after the liturgy and treat the elements as consecrated. The Reformed (to my knowledge) unanimously deny this is the case, and the Lutherans (from my reading of Chemnitz and Gerhard) admit that Christ's presence persists but only for taking the Eucharist to the sick. The early Church affirmed Christ's presence in the Eucharist in the Catholic sense; they preserved it even for reasons which were not for the sick and nevertheless affirmed its lasting consecration (Ss. Irenaeus, Ambrose, Jerome, to name a few). The Catholic view of tradition tells us that this practice/belief (that Christ is still present post-liturgy) must be valid and true (since the universal church cannot err), but it does not establish a precept i.e. just because the whole Church often preserved the Eucharist, it does not mean we actually have to do it; it just means we can do so validly and licitly; it also means this is a certain rule which Protestants contradicted (from a Catholic POV). Even if communion in both kinds was the universal practice (which it was not), this would not suffice to say the Tridentine Church is in contradiction, since this would only tell us it is valid (duh, so does Scripture). There would need to be a unanimous testimony from the Fathers of, let's say, the fourth century, that communion in both kinds is the only way and that to oppose this is heresy; a testimony which does not exist and is even contradicted.

Kevin Fernandez

32,660 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

If you pay close attention, you'll notice that the church does not have a tabernacle because it is still under construction and has not yet been dedicated. The reason I post these videos is to show that while there are a few priests who do not celebrate the Mass with the reverence it deserves, there are many more who do. We should not allow the actions of a few to create the false impression that the Novus Ordo Mass is inherently irreverent. My diocese is blessed with priests who celebrate the Holy Mass with profound reverence and deep love for the Eucharist. The same can be said of countless parishes across Nigeria and, indeed, throughout Africa.
1:49

If you pay close attention, you'll notice that the church does not have a tabernacle because it is still under construction and has not yet been dedicated. The reason I post these videos is to show that while there are a few priests who do not celebrate the Mass with the reverence it deserves, there are many more who do. We should not allow the actions of a few to create the false impression that the Novus Ordo Mass is inherently irreverent. My diocese is blessed with priests who celebrate the Holy Mass with profound reverence and deep love for the Eucharist. The same can be said of countless parishes across Nigeria and, indeed, throughout Africa.

Uche is a girl 🇻🇦

30,638 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

The Catholic Church is widely regarded as one of the most structured, disciplined, and spiritually serious Christian denominations in the world. Its seriousness is reflected not only in its teachings but also in its worship, traditions, leadership, and moral expectations. This depth and consistency have been preserved for over two thousand years, shaping the lives of millions of believers across cultures and generations. At the heart of the Church’s seriousness is its strong sense of sacred tradition. Catholics believe that divine revelation comes through both Scripture and Tradition, faithfully handed down from the time of the Apostles. This continuity creates a deep respect for the doctrine, liturgy, and authority. The Church does not easily change its teachings to suit modern trends; instead, it carefully preserves what it believes to be eternal truths. Another key aspect is the reverence in worship, especially in the celebration of the Mass. The Holy Mass is not treated as a casual gathering but as a sacred encounter with God. Through the Eucharist, Catholics believe they receive the real presence of Jesus Christ. This belief calls for deep preparation, silence, respect, and devotion. Gestures such as kneeling, bowing, and even prostration, especially on solemn occasions like Good Friday, express humility and total surrender before God. The Church also emphasizes discipline and moral responsibility. Catholics are guided by a well-developed moral system rooted in natural law and divine commandments. Teachings on issues such as life, justice, sexuality, and human dignity are taken seriously and are often countercultural. The Sacrament of Confession encourages self-examination, repentance, and personal accountability, reinforcing a life of moral seriousness. Leadership within the Church further reflects its structured nature. No wonder, the authority of the Pope, along with bishops and priests, ensures unity and doctrinal consistency. This hierarchical system is not merely administrative but is seen as a spiritual responsibility entrusted to guide the faithful in truth and holiness. Moreover, the Catholic Church places great importance on education and intellectual tradition. From early theologians like St. Augustine of Hippo to scholars such as St. Thomas Aquinas, the Church has engaged deeply with philosophy, science, and ethics. This commitment to reason alongside faith shows that seriousness in the Catholic tradition is not blind but thoughtful and reflective. The lives of the saints serve as powerful examples of dedication, sacrifice, and unwavering faith. The Catholic Church is a serious denomination because it combines deep spiritual reverence, strong moral teachings, structured leadership, and a rich intellectual heritage. Its seriousness is not meant to burden believers but to guide them toward a meaningful, disciplined, and holy life rooted in truth and love. - Fr. Jonathan Daniel #CatholicChurch #CatholicFaith
0:49

The Catholic Church is widely regarded as one of the most structured, disciplined, and spiritually serious Christian denominations in the world. Its seriousness is reflected not only in its teachings but also in its worship, traditions, leadership, and moral expectations. This depth and consistency have been preserved for over two thousand years, shaping the lives of millions of believers across cultures and generations. At the heart of the Church’s seriousness is its strong sense of sacred tradition. Catholics believe that divine revelation comes through both Scripture and Tradition, faithfully handed down from the time of the Apostles. This continuity creates a deep respect for the doctrine, liturgy, and authority. The Church does not easily change its teachings to suit modern trends; instead, it carefully preserves what it believes to be eternal truths. Another key aspect is the reverence in worship, especially in the celebration of the Mass. The Holy Mass is not treated as a casual gathering but as a sacred encounter with God. Through the Eucharist, Catholics believe they receive the real presence of Jesus Christ. This belief calls for deep preparation, silence, respect, and devotion. Gestures such as kneeling, bowing, and even prostration, especially on solemn occasions like Good Friday, express humility and total surrender before God. The Church also emphasizes discipline and moral responsibility. Catholics are guided by a well-developed moral system rooted in natural law and divine commandments. Teachings on issues such as life, justice, sexuality, and human dignity are taken seriously and are often countercultural. The Sacrament of Confession encourages self-examination, repentance, and personal accountability, reinforcing a life of moral seriousness. Leadership within the Church further reflects its structured nature. No wonder, the authority of the Pope, along with bishops and priests, ensures unity and doctrinal consistency. This hierarchical system is not merely administrative but is seen as a spiritual responsibility entrusted to guide the faithful in truth and holiness. Moreover, the Catholic Church places great importance on education and intellectual tradition. From early theologians like St. Augustine of Hippo to scholars such as St. Thomas Aquinas, the Church has engaged deeply with philosophy, science, and ethics. This commitment to reason alongside faith shows that seriousness in the Catholic tradition is not blind but thoughtful and reflective. The lives of the saints serve as powerful examples of dedication, sacrifice, and unwavering faith. The Catholic Church is a serious denomination because it combines deep spiritual reverence, strong moral teachings, structured leadership, and a rich intellectual heritage. Its seriousness is not meant to burden believers but to guide them toward a meaningful, disciplined, and holy life rooted in truth and love. - Fr. Jonathan Daniel #CatholicChurch #CatholicFaith

Uche is a girl

24,503 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

"Those who removed the kneeler have done damage to the Catholic community." - Cardinal Arinze 🔥 The only reason to excuse why people shouldn't kneel during consecration according to Roman Missal is if the church where the Mass is happening is open air and the ground is muddy, if the person has arthritis or the person is too old or holding a baby. And I ask this with every humility: Why were the altar rails removed?? I was shocked to see a bishop deny a family the Eucharist in the 🇺🇸 US who knelt down to receive Jesus in the Eucharist. Does this mean that if I find myself in the US someday and I go to Mass and during Communion, if I kneel to receive Jesus who is fully present in the Eucharist, the priest can deny me the Eucharist even if I'm in the state of grace???
5:13

"Those who removed the kneeler have done damage to the Catholic community." - Cardinal Arinze 🔥 The only reason to excuse why people shouldn't kneel during consecration according to Roman Missal is if the church where the Mass is happening is open air and the ground is muddy, if the person has arthritis or the person is too old or holding a baby. And I ask this with every humility: Why were the altar rails removed?? I was shocked to see a bishop deny a family the Eucharist in the 🇺🇸 US who knelt down to receive Jesus in the Eucharist. Does this mean that if I find myself in the US someday and I go to Mass and during Communion, if I kneel to receive Jesus who is fully present in the Eucharist, the priest can deny me the Eucharist even if I'm in the state of grace???

Uche is a girl 🇻🇦

13,340 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

This protestant tried to convince a nun that the Eucharist is a symbol and not the Body and Blood of Christ. Imagine trying to debate a nun on the Eucharist 🤯. Anyways, I love how calm the nun responded to the protestant.
0:54

This protestant tried to convince a nun that the Eucharist is a symbol and not the Body and Blood of Christ. Imagine trying to debate a nun on the Eucharist 🤯. Anyways, I love how calm the nun responded to the protestant.

Uche is a girl 🇻🇦

38,288 görüntüleme • 21 gün önce

I accept the fact that the Catholic Church has those who are called extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist. But in this case, where a priest is right in front of the altar and is leaving that extraordinary minister, if I can assume, to return the Body of Christ to the tabernacle, I don't find it right. He can do that himself.
0:45

I accept the fact that the Catholic Church has those who are called extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist. But in this case, where a priest is right in front of the altar and is leaving that extraordinary minister, if I can assume, to return the Body of Christ to the tabernacle, I don't find it right. He can do that himself.

Rev .Vitus

35,834 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

This masterful clip from Mark A. Garcia is a MUST WATCH for all Protestants who engage with Roman Catholics. “Roman Catholic is not ever to be confused with old, or patristic, or medieval, or even pre-Reformational. We need to be very careful to avoid falling prey to that mindset which suggests Roman Catholic is everything up to the Reformation, and Protestant is everything from the Reformation forward. That, in fact, gives away the whole argument to Roman Catholics in the very context at issue of the Reformation and post-Reformation assemblies, who really is teaching, professing, believing, and worshipping in terms of the one faith, one holy catholic and apostolic church, the one faith given through scripture to the church. Roman Catholicism, technically speaking, is an innovation which takes its historic point ofdeparture at the Council of Trent. Not until the 1540s and following, at the Council of Trent, when the church represented in that assembly definitively and publicly ruled out of its communion what we now, as a result, call Protestant churches, not until they had taken this ecclesiastical action, public and objective action, to rule out of the visible church, those we now call Protestants, was there even such a thing inmeaningful terms as a Roman Catholic Church? As a result of that action, you see, they not only created Protestantism as a side, as a byproduct, as a consequence of that action, theyalso created themselves as the Roman Catholic Church.” Credits: Greystone Theological Institute - Rescuing Mary From Rome
4:03

This masterful clip from Mark A. Garcia is a MUST WATCH for all Protestants who engage with Roman Catholics. “Roman Catholic is not ever to be confused with old, or patristic, or medieval, or even pre-Reformational. We need to be very careful to avoid falling prey to that mindset which suggests Roman Catholic is everything up to the Reformation, and Protestant is everything from the Reformation forward. That, in fact, gives away the whole argument to Roman Catholics in the very context at issue of the Reformation and post-Reformation assemblies, who really is teaching, professing, believing, and worshipping in terms of the one faith, one holy catholic and apostolic church, the one faith given through scripture to the church. Roman Catholicism, technically speaking, is an innovation which takes its historic point ofdeparture at the Council of Trent. Not until the 1540s and following, at the Council of Trent, when the church represented in that assembly definitively and publicly ruled out of its communion what we now, as a result, call Protestant churches, not until they had taken this ecclesiastical action, public and objective action, to rule out of the visible church, those we now call Protestants, was there even such a thing inmeaningful terms as a Roman Catholic Church? As a result of that action, you see, they not only created Protestantism as a side, as a byproduct, as a consequence of that action, theyalso created themselves as the Roman Catholic Church.” Credits: Greystone Theological Institute - Rescuing Mary From Rome

Mason Craig

52,194 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

OTD April 2, 2005, 21 years ago, John Paul II "has returned to the house of his Father." Today, on Holy Thursday, it is worth to remember Karol Wojtyła's vision of priesthood from the last "Letter to Priests," which he wrote twenty days earlier, on March 13, 2005. The video images are from his first Way of the Cross as pontiff on April 13, 1979. *Eucharist as "formula of life" "If the whole Church draws life from the Eucharist, all the more then must the life of a priest be 'shaped' by the Eucharist. So for us, the words of institution must be more than a formula of consecration: they must be a 'formula of life.'" *Gratitude "In the Eucharist Jesus thanks the Father with us and for us. How could this thanksgiving of Jesus fail to shape the life of a priest? ... We have our crosses to bear — and we are certainly not the only ones! — but the gifts we have received are so great that we cannot fail to sing from the depths of our hearts our own Magnificat." *Priesthood as a gift to others "If he is able to offer himself as a gift, placing himself at the disposal of the community and at the service of anyone in need, his life takes on its true meaning." *A life of obedience "Obeying out of love, sacrificing even a certain legitimate freedom when the authoritative discernment of the Bishop so requires, the priest lives out in his own flesh that "take and eat" with which Christ, in the Last Supper, gave himself to the Church." *Holiness "It is our relationship to the Eucharist that most clearly challenges us to lead a 'sacred' life. This must shine forth from our whole way of being, but above all from the way we celebrate. Let us sit at the school of the saints!" "Vocations will certainly not be lacking if our manner of life is truly priestly, if we become more holy, more joyful, more impassioned in the exercise of our ministry." *Eucharistic adoration "To place ourselves before Jesus in the Eucharist, to take advantage of our 'moments of solitude' and to fill them with this Presence, is to enliven our consecration by our personal relationship with Christ, from whom our life derives its joy and its meaning." *Totus Tuus "Who more than Mary can help us taste the greatness of the Eucharistic mystery? She more than anyone can teach us how to celebrate the sacred mysteries with due fervour and to commune with her Son, hidden in the Eucharist. I pray to her, then, for all of you, and I entrust to her especially the elderly, the sick, and those in difficulty." Video: Caeremoniale Romanum via CTV
1:07

OTD April 2, 2005, 21 years ago, John Paul II "has returned to the house of his Father." Today, on Holy Thursday, it is worth to remember Karol Wojtyła's vision of priesthood from the last "Letter to Priests," which he wrote twenty days earlier, on March 13, 2005. The video images are from his first Way of the Cross as pontiff on April 13, 1979. *Eucharist as "formula of life" "If the whole Church draws life from the Eucharist, all the more then must the life of a priest be 'shaped' by the Eucharist. So for us, the words of institution must be more than a formula of consecration: they must be a 'formula of life.'" *Gratitude "In the Eucharist Jesus thanks the Father with us and for us. How could this thanksgiving of Jesus fail to shape the life of a priest? ... We have our crosses to bear — and we are certainly not the only ones! — but the gifts we have received are so great that we cannot fail to sing from the depths of our hearts our own Magnificat." *Priesthood as a gift to others "If he is able to offer himself as a gift, placing himself at the disposal of the community and at the service of anyone in need, his life takes on its true meaning." *A life of obedience "Obeying out of love, sacrificing even a certain legitimate freedom when the authoritative discernment of the Bishop so requires, the priest lives out in his own flesh that "take and eat" with which Christ, in the Last Supper, gave himself to the Church." *Holiness "It is our relationship to the Eucharist that most clearly challenges us to lead a 'sacred' life. This must shine forth from our whole way of being, but above all from the way we celebrate. Let us sit at the school of the saints!" "Vocations will certainly not be lacking if our manner of life is truly priestly, if we become more holy, more joyful, more impassioned in the exercise of our ministry." *Eucharistic adoration "To place ourselves before Jesus in the Eucharist, to take advantage of our 'moments of solitude' and to fill them with this Presence, is to enliven our consecration by our personal relationship with Christ, from whom our life derives its joy and its meaning." *Totus Tuus "Who more than Mary can help us taste the greatness of the Eucharistic mystery? She more than anyone can teach us how to celebrate the sacred mysteries with due fervour and to commune with her Son, hidden in the Eucharist. I pray to her, then, for all of you, and I entrust to her especially the elderly, the sick, and those in difficulty." Video: Caeremoniale Romanum via CTV

Paulina Guzik

12,507 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

The Roman Catholic transubstantiated Eucharist is another Jesus! The Eucharist does not exist without the Mass. The claim that Jesus can wholly and entirely be present, even in the smallest element of a crumb (1377), is utter blasphemy, degrading the King of Kings, the Lord of Glory, down to a crumb. If Jesus is wholly present in each individual wafer, then how many Jesus's does Catholicism have? But it gets worse. They believe that by consuming their consecrated host, it actually removes sin & preserves you from sin (CCC 1393-95). In the Presbyterorum Ordinis, it says this: That, "The priests must instruct their people to offer to God the Father, the divine victim in the sacrifice of the Mass..." So they're instructing people to join to the offering of Christ on the cross their own lives. Then in the Catholic Catechism 1368 it says "...the Eucharist, the sacrifice of Christ becomes also the sacrifice of the members of his body, and that Christ's sacrifice present on the altar makes it possible for all generations of Christians to be united with his offering." The Christian does not offer themselves along with Christ on the cross. There's nothing we can do to add to the finished work of Jesus on the cross two thousand years ago. So not only is the Roman Catholic transubstantiated Eucharist blasphemy, but the entire Mass itself is heresy. Jesus himself was never a victim, but a victor on the cross, and at the Last Supper, he said, "Take and eat," not, "Make more offerings and sacrifices to the Father" #bible #christianlife #theology #christianapologetics
2:56

The Roman Catholic transubstantiated Eucharist is another Jesus! The Eucharist does not exist without the Mass. The claim that Jesus can wholly and entirely be present, even in the smallest element of a crumb (1377), is utter blasphemy, degrading the King of Kings, the Lord of Glory, down to a crumb. If Jesus is wholly present in each individual wafer, then how many Jesus's does Catholicism have? But it gets worse. They believe that by consuming their consecrated host, it actually removes sin & preserves you from sin (CCC 1393-95). In the Presbyterorum Ordinis, it says this: That, "The priests must instruct their people to offer to God the Father, the divine victim in the sacrifice of the Mass..." So they're instructing people to join to the offering of Christ on the cross their own lives. Then in the Catholic Catechism 1368 it says "...the Eucharist, the sacrifice of Christ becomes also the sacrifice of the members of his body, and that Christ's sacrifice present on the altar makes it possible for all generations of Christians to be united with his offering." The Christian does not offer themselves along with Christ on the cross. There's nothing we can do to add to the finished work of Jesus on the cross two thousand years ago. So not only is the Roman Catholic transubstantiated Eucharist blasphemy, but the entire Mass itself is heresy. Jesus himself was never a victim, but a victor on the cross, and at the Last Supper, he said, "Take and eat," not, "Make more offerings and sacrifices to the Father" #bible #christianlife #theology #christianapologetics

The Bible In Context

68,044 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Is this your "visible" Church of Christ? I recently finished compiling this 12 minute video of typical "Masses" and liturgical services in the Novus Ordo sect of which Prevost is the head. It's a very small sample of hundreds of similar clips I've saved over the past couple of years. With few exceptions, these clips only include things which are seen on a day-to-day basis in the Novus Ordo. I've taken the clips from many different countries and languages to show that these things are not merely abuses in some part of the world but are a defining characteristic of the entire Novus Ordo sect. You will see not only "priests" but many "bishops" participating in these behaviors. These are not isolated abuses opposed by the "hierarchy," as some Novus Ordo apologists claim. This is normal Novus Ordo behavior fully supported by that sect and its "hierarchy" from the lowest parish "priest" to the "pope." You'll notice the following are pretty standard: 1) Altar girls 2) Women ministers of "communion" and even of blessings and sacramentals (even giving ashes to the "priest"!) 3) Inculturation of pagan practices, secular songs, and dance into the "Mass." 4) Drums, guitars, clapping are ubiquitous. 5) Evident lack of belief in the Real Presence. These clips are nearly indistinguishable from Protestant services aside from the presence of statues of saints in some churches. In fact, it is so hard to tell the difference that it is possible I might have let a clip or two slip through that are from some Protestant denomination despite going to considerable trouble to confirm the source of each video. The plain and simple truth is that the Novus Ordo sect is just another heretical Protestant religion. If you are struggling with accepting the #sedevacante conclusion because you say that would be the end of the visible Church, I ask you to consider what makes the Catholic Church visible? Do "Masses" with drums, altar girls, laywomen ministers and faithless "priest presiders" make a church the visible Church of Christ? In that case, why don't we accept the Lutherans or Anglicans as the visible Church since they have these same things and the same appearance of order and hierarchy as the Novus Ordo does? No. The Catholic Church is visible because she has four visible, i.e. clearly identifiable, marks. Her members and her hierarchy of bishops and priests are recognizable through the outward profession of the same Faith, the same worship, and submission to the same authority, i.e., during a vacancy, the true Popes of the past and willingness to submit to the next true Pope. The mere absence of a Pope for the time being does not make the Church less visible or identifiable. But if she could ever become what you see in this video, she would indeed be visible, but not as Catholic. She would be a defected church. Christ has promised us this could never happen. Christ has promised us that the Novus Ordo is not and never can be the Catholic Church. If you believe the religion seen in this video is Christ's Church just because you can "see" it, then the modernists have succeeded in forming an entirely new idea of Christ's Church in your mind, one which is not the spotless Bride of Christ mentioned by St. Paul.
11:56

Is this your "visible" Church of Christ? I recently finished compiling this 12 minute video of typical "Masses" and liturgical services in the Novus Ordo sect of which Prevost is the head. It's a very small sample of hundreds of similar clips I've saved over the past couple of years. With few exceptions, these clips only include things which are seen on a day-to-day basis in the Novus Ordo. I've taken the clips from many different countries and languages to show that these things are not merely abuses in some part of the world but are a defining characteristic of the entire Novus Ordo sect. You will see not only "priests" but many "bishops" participating in these behaviors. These are not isolated abuses opposed by the "hierarchy," as some Novus Ordo apologists claim. This is normal Novus Ordo behavior fully supported by that sect and its "hierarchy" from the lowest parish "priest" to the "pope." You'll notice the following are pretty standard: 1) Altar girls 2) Women ministers of "communion" and even of blessings and sacramentals (even giving ashes to the "priest"!) 3) Inculturation of pagan practices, secular songs, and dance into the "Mass." 4) Drums, guitars, clapping are ubiquitous. 5) Evident lack of belief in the Real Presence. These clips are nearly indistinguishable from Protestant services aside from the presence of statues of saints in some churches. In fact, it is so hard to tell the difference that it is possible I might have let a clip or two slip through that are from some Protestant denomination despite going to considerable trouble to confirm the source of each video. The plain and simple truth is that the Novus Ordo sect is just another heretical Protestant religion. If you are struggling with accepting the #sedevacante conclusion because you say that would be the end of the visible Church, I ask you to consider what makes the Catholic Church visible? Do "Masses" with drums, altar girls, laywomen ministers and faithless "priest presiders" make a church the visible Church of Christ? In that case, why don't we accept the Lutherans or Anglicans as the visible Church since they have these same things and the same appearance of order and hierarchy as the Novus Ordo does? No. The Catholic Church is visible because she has four visible, i.e. clearly identifiable, marks. Her members and her hierarchy of bishops and priests are recognizable through the outward profession of the same Faith, the same worship, and submission to the same authority, i.e., during a vacancy, the true Popes of the past and willingness to submit to the next true Pope. The mere absence of a Pope for the time being does not make the Church less visible or identifiable. But if she could ever become what you see in this video, she would indeed be visible, but not as Catholic. She would be a defected church. Christ has promised us this could never happen. Christ has promised us that the Novus Ordo is not and never can be the Catholic Church. If you believe the religion seen in this video is Christ's Church just because you can "see" it, then the modernists have succeeded in forming an entirely new idea of Christ's Church in your mind, one which is not the spotless Bride of Christ mentioned by St. Paul.

Fr. Gabriel Lavery

24,423 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

If you are a Christian and not a Catholic, then that is a big problem, and I genuinely feel sad for you. One of the things I love Fr. Beard for is how he says things with authority. He doesn't mince his words, especially when it comes to the doctrines of the church. Anyone who rejects the Eucharist has rejected Jesus and will not go to Heaven. Jesus said this himself in simple words.
0:43

If you are a Christian and not a Catholic, then that is a big problem, and I genuinely feel sad for you. One of the things I love Fr. Beard for is how he says things with authority. He doesn't mince his words, especially when it comes to the doctrines of the church. Anyone who rejects the Eucharist has rejected Jesus and will not go to Heaven. Jesus said this himself in simple words.

Uche is a girl 🇻🇦

21,545 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce