The Independent Catholic Movement

The eucharistic sacrifice which you speak of is blasphemy. It is called transubstantiation, the supposedly changing of bread and wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ. It thus is an actual sacrifice, as you call it the sacrifice of the mass. That is blasphemy.
Christ ONCE suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the spirit.
Christ cannot be sacrificed over and over again, as the Catholics do in their masses. Protestants and/or Baptists do not celebrate the Lord's supper in this way.
2Cor.5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
DHK

 

DHK, have you not noticed the eternal ongoing sacrifce of our Lord in the Book of Revelation?

 

DHK, you pretend to not understand the point.

You link words together in a way that creates a false impression.

GraceSaves was surprised at your claim that kissing the Pope's feet is a "doctrine".

It is not.

GraceSaves knows that it is not.

You know that it is not.

I would venture that everyone on this board knows that it is not.

But you seem compelled to say it anyway.

As with your claim that the Mass is twenty minutes; when someone tells me a lie, everything they say is suspect.

On a side note, are a love of Scripture and a lack of respect for truth in general in any way compatible?

I think not. You claim the former but demostrate the latter.

Not judging, merely stating the truth (your own words).

 

DHK,

So, basically, if it arises from a doctrine (you never provided what doctrine it arrises from), it therefore IS doctrine?

This is insane logic. It makes no sense. You string words together in your feeble attempt to display the anger you feel. I dare say you're making these things up on the fly, pulling some quotes here and quotes there and pretending they logically flow together to create an altogether amazing new belief of the Catholic Church.

If I did this with your Baptist beliefs, I'd be kicked outta here lickity-split. But as long as your turf is safe, you don't mind throwing litter on ours. Right?

 

DHK,

Thanks for avoiding my reference to Paul urging fellow Christians to call him "father." Just goes to show when you get proved wrong you refuse to admit. Heaven forbid that even one of your precious anti-Catholic beliefs be proven wrong.

 

DHK,

Everything you fail to understand you consider blasphemy. You have a sharp tongue and are hasty to rebuke and reject anything that you don't understand. That doesn't make it blasphemy. Would it not be you, rejecting Christ in the Eucharist, who is committing the blasphemy?

Get this: It's not even supposed! It really happens, whether you believe and trust in it or not! It's one of Christ's greatest graces that he bestows upon us.

Here's your faulty, hasty, poor logic again. Try reading Catholic doctrine before telling us what it means. It is the same, Same, SAME sacrifice, not a new one. We do not re-sacrifice Christ. We re-present that very same sacrifice. BIG DIFFERENCE. Stop lying about Catholics. We do NOT do what you say we do.

Not true. The Orthodox churches do. The Anglicans do. The Lutherans do (through Consubstantiation, but still in the Real Presence of Christ Jesus). You lie when you say Protestants do not. Not all do, but some do.

Amen. I hope this wasn't trying to prove your argument, though, because it doesn't.

 

I am not here to defend Catholic doctrine. You ask me to provide the doctrine it arises from? That is your job! You ought to know your own catechism and doctrine. I gave you an accurate quote from your own official website of your own practice and teaching of "kissing the pope's feet." The Catholics believe (it must be doctrine or teaching to believe), and therefore practice. You cannot explain why. Your own website alludes to the fact that this practice has origins in paganism. It is not Biblical, just as many other Catholic "doctrines." Define and defend your doctrines with Scripture, not mudslinging.
DHK

 

I don't know what bible you use, Gracesaves, but the KJV does not ask Paul to be called Father. It reads...

"...for in Jesus Christ I have begotten you through the Gospel." Begotten in this verse only means that Paul laid the groundwork for the church in Corinth. Paul never asked anyone to call him father. Salvation was not thru Paul, it was, and is, thru Jesus Christ only.

 

Obviously, DHK. However, you attack doctrines without even naming them. That makes no sense, and it irresponsible posting.

DHK, when you argue a point, you are supposed to provide something to make it work. You have not. I have full right to reject the validity of your argument because you are making ME disprove something that you refuse to prove! That's called argument from ignorance. And as far as I know, "kissing the pope's feet" isn't in the Catechism, because it is unimportant to the worldwide Catholic audience. It's a practice for the "private audience" of the Pope. This is not a doctrine.

Yes, you gave an accurate quotation on the kissing of the Pope's feet. Wow. Thanks.

No. This makes no sense. A practice is not a doctrine. Never has been. You fabricate this.

I cannot explain what? I have explained that this is a private practice when in the presence of the Pope, but that in no way makes it a binding doctrine on the Catholics of the entire world. It is YOUR job to prove this, because it's not truth.

So what? This is not a Christ-centered doctrine. This is a practice that merely honors the Pope. You are being irrational.

Logical fallacy. Because you "believe" and have not proved this is an unbiblical doctrine (because it's not a doctrine), that gives you no right to assert that "many other" Catholic doctrines are the same way.

Again, when I didn't make the argument, and you did, you should define the doctrine you are challenging, not give me a quote, tell me to find the doctrine, and then defend it. That's not how discussion works.

God bless you, DHK, and may he unharden your heart.

GraceSaves

 

DHK,

You've been down the "kissing the Pope's feet is doctrine" road before.

It's bogus.

You know it's bogus.

We all know it's bogus.

If you really were a Catholic before as you claim, you would do a better job of representing Catholic beliefs and doctrine. Or maybe you were just a really, really bad Catholic.

Your claim to a twenty minute Mass (I now see that you have ammended it to thirty minutes)is evidence that if you ever actually attended a Mass at some point in your life, you either got there very late or left very early.

A person is known by their fruits.

What fruits does one present when one says something other than the truth?

 

DHK,

If you were presented to the Queen of England, and she extended her hand to be kissed? Would you kiss it, or would you ignore her?

Now, compare the queen of England to the Pope, who we hold to be the Vicar of Christ, the man in the physical stead of Christ until he returns to earth. Regardless of what you personally believe about the Pope, we hold his office in high esteem. Whereas British people would gladly kiss the queen's hand, we would gladly kiss the Pope's feet. It's a gesture; it's a humbling of ourselves. It's not a doctrine that defines Catholic faith or morals.

 

DHK,

This is exactly what I'm talking about:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08663a.htm

Could you have not posted the URL were you "stole" this information from? You copied it word for word without accrediting it, and thus forcing me to search it out for myself just to disprove you. This is not good discussion.

Let's look at the whole thing, shall we?

KISSING OF THE FEET
The veneration shown in the kissing of a person's hand or the hem of his garment is accentuated in the kissing of the feet. This is probably implied by the phrase of Isaias (xlix, 23): "Kings...shall lick up the dust of Thy feet." Under the influence, no doubt, of the ceremonial of king-worship, as manifested in the cultus of the Roman emperors, this particular mark of veneration came to prevail at an early date among the usages of the papal court (see Lattey, "Ancient King-Worship", Lond., 1909 C. T. S. pamhlet). We read of it in the first "Ordo Romanus" belonging to the seventh century, but even earlier than this the "Liber Pontificalis" attests that the Emperor Justin paid this mark of respect to Pope John I (523-26), as later on Justinian II also did to Pope Constantine. At the election of Leo IV (847) the custom of so kissing the pope's foot was spoken of as an ancient one. It is not, therefore, wonderful that a practice supported by so early a tradition should still be observed. It is observed liturgically in a solemn papal Mass by the Latin and Greek subdeacons, and quasi-liturgically in the "adoration" of the pope by the cardinals after his election. It is also the normal salutation which papal etiquette prescribes for those of the faithful who are presented to the pope in a private audience. In his "De altaris mysterio" (VI, 6) Innocent III explains that this ceremony indicates "the very great reverence due to the Supreme Pontiff as the Vicar of Him whose feet" were kissed by the woman who was a sinner.

It's called a practice. It's only done at certain instances. It's veneration.

It's not worship. It's a practice of showing someone great honor; you don't need Biblical support to show someone great honor. It's not a doctrine, because doctrines deal with faith and moral.

You have lied to us in insisting this is a doctrine. You have put the burden on us of disproving an agurment which you did not document or provide any evidence for (other than a non-attributed quotation). You have used the very mention of this practice to further downgrade a Church that you are showing your distinct lack of knowledge about.

I pray from now on you do not attack every piece of anti-Catholic propaganda you can get your hands on, because so much of it is truly unfounded. Discuss the important issues.

 

GraceSaves,

It's a waste of effort. DHK has been down this road before. If you look back in the old threads, you will find he has made this same bogus "kissing Pope's feet is doctrine" claim before.

DHK has a well known and documented history here of erroneously representing Catholic doctrine, practice, beliefs, knowledge, etc., and then supporting it with "I was a Catholic!"

If (and that is a very big "if" in my mind) he ever actually was Catholic at any point in his life, I suspect that it was in name only. His knowledge of the Church is simply to poor for him to be taken seriously in that regard.

Signed,
Been there, done that, bored with the guy.

 

GraceSaves and Trying2Understand:
I thank you two for picking up where I left off here... I saw right away the fire brewing inside of a couple hardened hearts and decided not to dignify their outrageous posts with my response. This shouldn't be a habit, but thanks for dealing with the dirty work...

 

Alright DHK, I'm forced to come out to correct your ignorance here...

VENERATION; 1.a feeling of deep respect; reverence 2. The act of showing respect or reverence.

Look it up... it is not synonomous with worship so please stop claiming it is. Veneration is something we should show to our parents, grandparents, teachers... etc.

Also, bowing down is not worship. Jesus was bowing down when he washed his Apostles feet... was He worshipping them??? People bow down to kings and queens. Japanese people bow all the time to greet one another... is this worship???

I'm sorry to see that you seem so close minded and hateful toward Catholicism... but your blinders are plain as day DHK. I will pray for you.

Since we are the ones doing it, I think we would know if we were kissing his feet in an act of worship and adoration as you claim. We aren't.

 

Wow DHK! I didn't know you had the exact same dictionary as me! For crying out loud why would I only quote it partially... I stated what mine: The World Book (1980 something) said. Get over it.

Secondly, your making a false dichotomy between veneration and worship with your example. It's absurd and unfounded and I refuse to discuss this any more with you because you are paying no attention to anything anyone says that may thwart against your precious idealogy to prove it wrong.