Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Ale Mary" Dive Bar Uses Monstrance and Chalices for Drunken Revelries
Eponymous Flower ^ | March 25, 2012

Posted on 03/26/2012 1:38:33 PM PDT by NYer

Edit: A definition from Wikipedia is useful here: Blasphemy is irreverence towards religious or holy persons or things.[1] Some countries have laws to punish blasphemy,[2] while others have laws to give recourse to those who are offended by blasphemy. 


[Fell's Point, Baltimore, MD] There was a show called "Cheers" on television years ago.  It was bawdy and vulgar yet there were some borders it was not safe to pass in the early 80s when the show first aired.  It depicted a homey place, reminiscent of an unpretentious neighborhood bar with a hint of old world ambiance and Boston charm.  The heavy wooden furniture and the bar spoke of permanence, elegance,  and  that favorite piety of secular artists, human dignity. It was not always clear who the show's buffoons were, but you knew them when you saw them, and sometimes, it was a comedic mailman who could be the most noble in the simplicity of his fears.  Some other writer said something about irony being lost on a society which had no shame.  That's why we'd like to wield a metaphorical hammer.  Perhaps there are others who can put a better finish on the details of what we will tell.

Satirical painting: priest displeased with Nun?

All we can say is that sometimes evil is really mundane and some of us don't realize that we're not only bufoons needlessly offending  people's religious sensibilities, but far worse than that, we're offending God.  Even the name of the bar, a pun on the Blessed Mother's name seems calculated to be offensive.

Would you like some candy?

 We're not talking about this place, but it's not far from Boston, but it boasts a similar unmistakable charm you'd expect in New England with friendly folks.

One of the features of the bar, and there are many, is its unmistakable Catholic ambiance. It's called, Ale Mary's and is located in Fell's point Maryland. One can just smell the faint aroma of the ocean as you think about it. The food is inexpensive, but if you're Catholic you might find it too expensive for the peace of your conscience to see the sacramental elements of your religion appear for the sake of decoration in peculiarly deliberate ways.

Chalices Used for Holy Sacrifice Being Abused by Patrons

It's not surprising, but it's not acceptable either that chalices which are used in Catholic Mass for the consecration of wine which becomes the blood of Christ, are used by patrons to drink (and get drunk from). They're made of precious metals, sometimes jewels, but their use in such a secular setting is strange and unsettling. No less than the inexplicable painting of a priest with a stole, looking aghast or in surprise at a nun who has her back to him.

The most disturbing thing in the restaurant is the monstrance which is behind the bar used as decoration. The monstrance is large ornate disk, often resembling the sun, which is surmounted in a long stand with a heavy base. It contains a crystal compartment at the center of the disk where a consecrated communion Host can be placed inside and it allows the priest to elevate the entire object by the stand for the veneration of the Sacrament it contains. Seeing this monstrance here in this bar, covered with mardigras beads and a mustached smiley face where the Host would normally be is a little bit like finding family heirlooms in the hands of people who not only use them for purposes for which they were never intended, but use them in disrespectful ways.


Mustached Smiley Face Seems Particularly Malevolent

We found out about this recently and the individual who sent this to us wrote an e-mail complaining about the display of these religious items and even offered to purchase them. Far from being treated with the respect she deserved, her concerns were met with derision. 

Despite the bar owner claiming that no one cared about this clearly blasphemous display of religious artifacts, he asked her to remove an entry she made under the bar at a public site allowing comment on establishments.

As he berated our friend, the proprietor insisted as an argument to justify his sacrilege and disrespect for Catholic sacramentals, that there were even Bishops and priests who thought that his blasphemous inclusion of religious articles was comical and that there was nothing wrong with this display.

Apparently, there's some truth to what he says, because Catholic clergy, including senior, does frequent this place.

We'll be praying a Rosary in reparation for having seen this blasphemy.  Hopefully, the proprietor can be persuaded to part with these items before word of this affects his business either spiritually or financially.


Give them a call:

Corner of Fleet & Washington Sts.
Fell's Point
Baltimore, MD.
21231
410-276-2044


TOPICS: Current Events; Moral Issues
KEYWORDS: bar; md; sacramentals
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-231 next last
Comment #101 Removed by Moderator

To: frogjerk
The Lord also spoke about not giving what is Holy to dogs.

Golden colored cups and the artwork you call a monstrance are not Holy...And the people drinking out of them are not the dogs of scripture...

102 posted on 03/27/2012 4:54:42 PM PDT by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
"Golden colored cups and the artwork you call a monstrance are not Holy..."

No more so than the Ark of the Covenant.

103 posted on 03/27/2012 5:06:20 PM PDT by Natural Law (If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; vladimir998
From St. John Damascene (also see post #100 above):

"The account given by the Liturgy of the life of this holy Doctor is so complete that we need add nothing further. But it will be well to give a short summary of the definitions by which in the eighth and sixteenth centuries the Church has avenged the holy Images from the attacks made on them by hell. The second Council of Nicaea declares that: 'It is lawful to place in churches, in frescoes, in pictures, on vestments and the sacred vessels, on the walls of houses and in public streets, images, whether painted or mosaic or of other suitable material, representing Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, our most pure Lady, the holy Mother of God, the angels and the saints; and it is equally lawful to burn incense before them and surround them with lights' [Second Council of Nicaea, Session VII.]. 'Not that we must believe that these images have any divinity or virtue of their own,' says the Council of Trent against the Protestants, 'or that we must put our confidence in them as the pagans did in their idols. But the honour which given to the images is referred to Christ the prototype, to whom through them all our veneration is addressed, and to the saints whom we venerate in their portraits' [Council of Trent, Session XXV.]."

104 posted on 03/27/2012 5:24:46 PM PDT by Pyro7480 (Viva Cristo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; Natural Law
Cease and desist from posting catholic propaganda and falsehoods, and your uninformed opinion of me, per religion forum rules.

Speaking of propaganda and falsehoods, I'd still like to know where you get your information from.

I can't imagine those sources to be more accurate than whatever Natural Law posted.

105 posted on 03/27/2012 6:17:50 PM PDT by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon; Natural Law

I’ve never observed NL to post particularly valid info.

Natural law proponents usually tend to be secularists, and atheists.

I used the Bible primarily. The Revelation prophesied the papists, and The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire records the fulfillment. Professor Walter Veith also does an excellent analysis on it. The links on that have been posted her many times for those intellectually honest enough to read them.


106 posted on 03/27/2012 6:40:40 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Of course, Nicea and Trent were excellent dog and pony shows for those wishing to sidestep the second commandment (the real one, not the catholic version).

Neither of them were for true Bible believers.


107 posted on 03/27/2012 6:44:45 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

Comment #108 Removed by Moderator

To: editor-surveyor
I used the Bible primarily. The Revelation prophesied the papists, and The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire records the fulfillment. Professor Walter Veith also does an excellent analysis on it.

So you think that Revelation says that the Catholic Church was founded by the pharisees in the Fourth Century?

If so, any particular verses?

109 posted on 03/27/2012 6:58:10 PM PDT by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon; Natural Law; editor-surveyor
Cease and desist from posting catholic propaganda and falsehoods, and your uninformed opinion of me, per religion forum rules.

Speaking of propaganda and falsehoods, I'd still like to know where you get your information from.

I can't imagine those sources to be more accurate than whatever Natural Law posted.

True. N-L's posts are usually quite accurate and to the point. He is not blinded by antiCatholic hatred.

110 posted on 03/27/2012 7:00:19 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; Pyro7480
Of course, Nicea and Trent were excellent dog and pony shows for those wishing to sidestep the second commandment (the real one, not the catholic version).

Very good. Non Trinitarians are exposed as non Christians. Thank you for pointing this out. Would you be able to help us in further identifying further departures from the Christian faith as canonized by the Church?

111 posted on 03/27/2012 7:04:59 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr

The bride of Christ doesn’t need nicolaitan canons; it has the Holy Spirit to guide Bible study.

Of course, catholics have no more concept of how the Holy Spirit works in the real church than a blind man has of a color wheel.

Keep on thrashing; you remind me of Sambo’s tigers running around the tree until they turn into butter.
.


112 posted on 03/27/2012 7:33:55 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon

The “he who lets” that was taken out of the way was the Roman empire, and the very first pope, rising in the aftermath of Rome was the second fulfillment of the “little horn.”
.


113 posted on 03/27/2012 7:40:57 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

What has led you to interpret those lines that way? Could it be a commentary by Veith?


114 posted on 03/27/2012 7:53:13 PM PDT by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon

That has been the traditional way that the Calvinists interpret it, and this time thay got one right.

The most important point in understanding Revelation lies in understanding that the book is mostly to be read literally; then everything falls into place, including the wound unto death that was healed when the popes were restored to power in the political realm.


115 posted on 03/27/2012 7:58:19 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Freedom of speech and association not your thing?


116 posted on 03/27/2012 8:15:01 PM PDT by Ajnin (Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnocet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
That has been the traditional way that the Calvinists interpret it, and this time thay got one right.

I have never heard Calvinists say that the Catholic Church was created by Pharisees in the Fourth Century.

The most important point in understanding Revelation lies in understanding that the book is mostly to be read literally

Your interpretation is not literal, or else the "little horn" would really be interpreted as being an actual little horn.

117 posted on 03/27/2012 8:32:29 PM PDT by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: NYer; lilycicero; MaryLou1; glock rocks; JPG; Monkey Face; RIghtwardHo; pieces of time; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.


118 posted on 03/27/2012 8:37:14 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

The 2nd Amendment forbids all imagery, except that it does not. It is part of the prohibition of idolatry, which the worship of no god except the God who has no image. Except our image, which is the shape he assumed. But Christians worship an incarnate God, and hold to a paradox, that the one God is yet three, that the Great God is the same as the small. That the Word can be made flesh. That we die and yet live.


119 posted on 03/27/2012 11:07:29 PM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon

The written word needs a true interpreter. I am reminded, someone of the Star Treck episode where the primitives Kirk encounters have a sacred writing and he understands nothing.Until he looks at the document and sounds it out differently, discovering it to be in fact something familar to every American.


120 posted on 03/27/2012 11:12:33 PM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
yes it is the Christian way. It is what Christians have believed since the 1st century --> refer to the Didache for how the mass is a continuation from AD 70, refer to that too and Justin the Martyr's letter to the Emperor that we Christians believe in the literal body of Christ in the Eucharist.

This is what Christians have believed. If someone holds to some different views, it is a new-fangled creation, on par to Unitarianism or Jehovah's Witnesses.

121 posted on 03/28/2012 12:37:42 AM PDT by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS; All

The 2nd Amendment forbids all imagery, except that it does not. It is part of the prohibition of idolatry ....


RobbyS -I know most people are deadly serious about the right to bear arms, but I don’t think it is in the Word.
A nice summing up though, and equally applicable to Catholic (though it is not a commandment we have, we are instructed as to that verbally) as to Protestant.
Sorry, the typo just gave me a quiet chuckle.

As far as the actual story goes, yes, it got me both uncomfortable and indignant. If I went into this bar, or indeed any bar that displayed a monstrance as bar decor, I would simply leave without ordering. It is a bit like hanging a “No Bar Tabs” sign on a cross, or using a Menorah as mood lighting. Both of those I have seen in bars, expressed my opinion and left.

The chalices on the other hand - to most people they are just cups. I have seen exactly the same design of chalice used in mead halls, purchased from the same maker as makes chalices for communion. Have one myself and sometimes used to use it.

The bar owner is guilty of mockery of the Sacrament IMO, as he chose these items deliberately for his bar. He’ll face some hard questions when he stands to Judgement.

Most of the customers just want a beer and don’t care if it comes in a chalice, a paper cup or a swill bucket.


122 posted on 03/28/2012 4:38:00 AM PDT by EnglishCon (Gingrich/Santorum 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
yes it is the Christian way. It is what Christians have believed since the 1st century --> refer to the Didache for how the mass is a continuation from AD 70, refer to that too and Justin the Martyr's letter to the Emperor that we Christians believe in the literal body of Christ in the Eucharist.

This is what Christians have believed. If someone holds to some different views, it is a new-fangled creation, on par to Unitarianism or Jehovah's Witnesses.

Really??? In the Didache, it is forbidden to baptize babies...So when did your religion insert that one???

123 posted on 03/28/2012 7:52:18 AM PDT by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
"In the Didache, it is forbidden to baptize babies..."

Perhaps you have a different Didache? The one I am familiar with says nothing about infant baptism one way or another.

Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

Now before you get all indignant and preachy define "fasting" and how it does and does not apply to infants. Most interpretations refer to abstinence from solid foods and none specifically address or prohibit mothers milk. (Besides, there is that whole household thing in Acts).

124 posted on 03/28/2012 8:49:21 AM PDT by Natural Law (If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon

I see your game now; I’ll waste no more time replying to the inflatable bouncing clown.


125 posted on 03/28/2012 9:42:35 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

>> “ and Justin the Martyr’s letter to the Emperor that we Christians believe in the literal body of Christ in the Eucharist” <<

.
The problem is that Christ doesn’t believe in it. See John 6:63, where he makes it clear that it is a spiritual metaphor.
.


126 posted on 03/28/2012 10:02:55 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

So, you’re saying that we should simply shoot catholics for removing the 2nd Commandment from the other nine?

A little much I’d say; the Lord will be giving them enough headaches at the Great White Throne.


127 posted on 03/28/2012 10:09:55 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; Cronos
"The problem is that Christ doesn’t believe in it. See John 6:63, where he makes it clear that it is a spiritual metaphor."

Every verse needs to be read in the context it is presented in order to gain an understanding of its meaning. When we read John 6 we discover that Jesus was speaking literally to the extent that he provoked a negative response from His disciples. When given an opportunity to soften His statement or clarify that He was using a metaphor He did not.

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”

"Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. 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. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.” - John 6:47-58

As for this being a "clear" metaphor we need only look to the Early Church Fathers and to St. Paul to see how they interpreted it. They too believed it to be a literal command:

" For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”

For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes. - 1 Corinthians 11:23-26

128 posted on 03/28/2012 10:55:21 AM PDT by Natural Law (If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
The Commandments are not numbered. Not in the Hebrew. The Commandments are, after all, just one long prologue to the Law that follows, which is a kind of constitution of the nation of Israel. The prohibition of icons is basically saying that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is NOT like the gods that Abraham’s father made back in Ur, or the Canaanite gods, or the Egyptians or the Greek gods, or the Arabian gods that Mohammad saw in the Kaaba.

The Ark was the only sacred object that the Jews worshipped, and part of that were the carved figures that adorned the Ark. Of course, the temple itself, which was just a stone replica of the Tent, was, in a way, a sacred object. And of course, the Scriptures, also made by human hands, are also sacred objects, and frequent adored with pictures of holy people. The Muslims, of course, don’t do this. Are you sure you are not a Muslim?

129 posted on 03/28/2012 11:22:20 AM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

The Amen,amen that begins his statement means: I AM NOT KIDDING! You guys are not getting my meaning!


130 posted on 03/28/2012 11:26:32 AM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

I love watching you slither!

The commandments are given in an order, and it is the second in that order that condemns the iconic idolatry of the catholic abomination.
.


131 posted on 03/28/2012 11:28:11 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
I see your game now; I’ll waste no more time replying to the inflatable bouncing clown.

Huh?

So your response to any reasonable discussion is to cover your ears?

132 posted on 03/28/2012 11:29:26 AM PDT by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

.
The commandments are given in an order, and it is the second in that order that condemns the iconic idolatry of the catholic abomination.
.

The Ark was not worshiped; in fact, in practice only the high priest even entered to it, and then only after filling the place with enough smoke that he couldn’t even see it.

They worshiped only YHWH.
.


133 posted on 03/28/2012 11:31:52 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon

I have no time for childish games.
.


134 posted on 03/28/2012 11:33:18 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
"The Ark was not worshiped; in fact, in practice only the high priest even entered to it, and then only after filling the place with enough smoke that he couldn’t even see it."

No priest or person ever entered the Ark. It was a box 1.31×0.79×0.79 m in size.

135 posted on 03/28/2012 11:36:17 AM PDT by Natural Law (If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

They are given in order but not numbered .In any case, you are not willing to entertain any reading of the Scripture that contradicts what your master has told you By master I mean just another guy like yourself, and he is but repeating what others has told him, You have your own bishops; they just don’t wear the title.


136 posted on 03/28/2012 11:37:42 AM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

Very amusing.


137 posted on 03/28/2012 11:38:59 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

Your opinion is proven to be in error by your own posting!


138 posted on 03/28/2012 11:40:59 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

I suggest you go back to exodus and read the instruction. The Ark sat in the Holy of Holies and was “worshipped.” To touch it was deadly. Hence the poles to carry it.


139 posted on 03/28/2012 11:42:06 AM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Who told you all this stuff you are posting?


140 posted on 03/28/2012 11:44:24 AM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
"Your opinion is proven to be in error by your own posting!"

I never posted my opinion. I clearly stated that my posting was the conclusion of St. Paul and the Early Church Fathers. It is also the position held by 90% of all Christians that have ever lived.

141 posted on 03/28/2012 11:45:25 AM PDT by Natural Law (If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

The commandments were not meant to be read by lawyers to change their meaning. They were cut into stone tablets for all to see and obey.

Catholics omit the second commandment, and pretend that it doesn’t exist.


142 posted on 03/28/2012 11:46:25 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

More nonsense to smoke-up the room.

Paul’s writing demolished the pagan alchemy of transsubstantiation. Live with it.


143 posted on 03/28/2012 11:49:02 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; Natural Law

For starters, you need to re-read 1 Corinthians 11.


144 posted on 03/28/2012 11:54:18 AM PDT by Pyro7480 (Viva Cristo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

No one was suggesting that you play in childish games.


145 posted on 03/28/2012 11:56:37 AM PDT by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

-—Paul’s writing demolished the pagan alchemy of transsubstantiation. Live with it.-—

St. Paul:

For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you,k that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”

In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.

Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.

A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup.

For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.

That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying.


146 posted on 03/28/2012 12:04:26 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas (Viva Christo Rey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

And you apparently don’t realize that to a logical thinking believer, the scripture you post demolishes your position.

Catholics are amazing.


147 posted on 03/28/2012 12:36:35 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon

So that’s your objection?

That I refuse to play your game?


148 posted on 03/28/2012 12:37:56 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

I’m not playing any games.

Discussing history and Biblical interpretation is not a game.


149 posted on 03/28/2012 12:58:27 PM PDT by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
The logic in your universe must wear a goatee.


150 posted on 03/28/2012 1:34:08 PM PDT by Pyro7480 (Viva Cristo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-231 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson