STEEPED IN A MISTY MORN OF MUSINGS...: October 2021

Wednesday, October 27, 2021

... AND JUST WHAT DO 'THIS' YEAR'S WITCHES WISH TO

INCLUDE

IN THEIR

NOXIOUS

BREW ???

Rosacea's perk,
Colossal jerk,
and Gaetz's
Slimy, seedy smirk...

Covid-bats,

Jet-black cats,

and tons of

Bright red

MAGA hats...

Gov's who lie,

Gov's who steal,

and some who simply

Lack appeal...

Then mix them up

[ So really well! ]

While folding in

The Gates of Hell...

Throw in cargo

[ Lost at sea ],

This brew's becoming

Toxic tea!

Its iniquitous taste

Mirrors an odious race,

'Politics as usual':

The GOP base.

Sunday, October 17, 2021

IS THERE ANOTHER WORD FOR 'MYSTERY' [ANYONE]?

The Roman Catholic religion has its panoply of dogmas, and that of transubstantiation [a.k.a. the Mystery of the Eucharist] could be considered downright delusional once you know the factual history...

So here's what a Ph.D. expert reveals:

"It is the very heart of Romanism and the key to the so-called 'sacrifice of the mass'. Transubstantiation is Rome's most lucrative, most powerful and most fixed dogma. Certainly it is her most effective ‘control device’ for the perpetuation of her gigantic corporation, whose existence is maintained by sacraments administered by a supposedly divinely empowered priesthood".

P A G A N O R I G I N

The doctrine of transubstantiation does NOT date back to the Last Supper as believed by many. It was a disputed topic for many centuries prior to officially becoming an 'article of faith', which now means that it is essential to salvation according to the Roman Catholic Church. The idea of a corporal presence was vaguely held by some, such as Ambrose, but it was not until 831 A.D. that Benedictine monk Paschasius Radbertus, published a treatise openly advocating the doctrine of transubstantiation. Even then, for almost another 400 years, theological 'war' was waged over this teaching. It wasn't until the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 A.D. where it was officially defined and canonized as a dogma.

"Like many of the beliefs and rites of Romanism, transubstantiation was first practiced by pagan religions. The noted historian Durant said that belief in transubstantiation as practiced by the priests of the Roman Catholic system is 'one of the oldest ceremonies of primitive religion'. In fact, the syncretism and mysticism of the Middle East were major factors in influencing the West, particularly Italy. In Egypt, priests would consecrate mesa cakes which were supposed to become the flesh of Osiris. The idea of transubstantiation was also characteristic of the religion of Mithra whose sacraments of cakes and Haoma drink closely parallel the Catholic Eucharistic rite. The idea of eating the flesh of a deity was also very popular among the people of Mexico and Central America long before they ever heard of Christ; and when Spanish missionaries first landed in those countries 'their surprise was heightened' when they witnessed a religious rite which reminded them of communion...an image made of actual flour. After consecration by [indigenous] priests, it was then distributed among the people who ate it...declaring it was the flesh of a deity..."

ENTER CONSTANTINE...

FACT: The Christian Church, for the first three hundred years, remained relatively pure and faithful to the 'Word of God', but after the so-called 'conversion' of Emperor Constantine, who for purely political expedience declared Christianity the state religion, thousands of pagans were admitted to the church by ‘baptism alone’ (i.e., without true conversion). In addition, they brought with them many pagan rites which they boldly introduced into the church, as well; yet, they did so using Christian terminology, therefore ultimately corrupting the original faith. Even the noted Catholic prelate and theologian, Cardinal Newman, tells us that Constantine introduced many things of pagan origin: "We are told in various ways by Eusebius, that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been already accustomed in their very own...The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holy days and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church." This unholy alliance also allowed the continuance of the pagan custom of eating and drinking the literal flesh and literal blood of their god... and this is [in reality] how transubstantiation, in due course, finally entered into the professing church.

The 'TESTIMONY of SCRIPTURE'

"Christians who correctly interpret the Word of God, see without any difficulty whatsoever, that our Lord's reference to His body and blood was symbolic. When Jesus spoke of Himself as being the bread, He was not teaching the fictitious transubstantiation of the Papal church. It is preposterous to hold that the Son of God turned a piece of bread into Himself. When Jesus said "this is my body" or "this is my blood", He did not materially transform the substance, but was explaining that He is the one "represented" by the Passover bread and wine. Jesus did not say touto gignetai, i.e., this has 'become' or is ‘turned into’, but touto esti, which can only mean ‘this represents, or stands for’. It is perfectly clear in the Gospels that Christ spoke in genuinely allegorical terms, figuratively referring to Himself as "the door," "the vine'', "the light," "the root," "the rock," "the bright and morning star." In Luke 22:22, Jesus said, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood." In First Corinthians 11:25, 26, He said, 'This is the new covenant in my blood...For as oft' as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord's death till he come.' In these words He used a double figure of speech...The cup was not literally the new covenant, although it is declared to be so as definitely as the bread is declared to be His body. They did not literally drink the cup, nor did they literally 'drink' the new covenant...Nor was the bread literally His body, or the wine literally His blood. After giving the wine to the disciples Jesus said, 'I shall not drink from henceforth of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come' (Luke 22:18). So the wine, even as He gave it to them, and after He had given it to them, remained 'the fruit of the vine'! Paul, too, says that the bread remains bread;...'but let each man prove himself, and so let him eat of the bread, and drink of the cup' (First Corinthians 11:28). No change had taken place in the element. This was after the prayer of consecration, when the Church of Rome supposes the change took place, and Jesus and Paul both declare that the elements still are bread and wine."

TRANSUBSTANTIATION

ACCORDING TO THE COUNCIL OF TRENT

"When Europe was electrified by the eloquent preaching of the sixteenth century Reformation, the Roman Catholic hierarchy gathered her ablest theologians who worked for three decades in the preparation of a statement of faith concerning transubstantiation. This document remains, to this day, the standard of Catholic doctrine. As the Second Vatican Council commenced, Pope John XXIII declared, "I do accept entirely all that has been decided and declared at the Council of Trent." What, then, did the Council of Trent decide and declare? "

Canon I: "If any one shall deny that the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore the entire Christ, are truly, really, and substantially contained in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; and shall say that He is only in it as a sign, or in a figure, or virtually, — let him be accursed."

Canon II: "If any one shall say that the substance of the bread and wine remains in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and shall deny that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the blood, the outward forms of the bread and wine still remaining, which conversion the Catholic church most aptly calls transubstantiation, — let him be accursed."

Canon III: "If any one shall deny, that in the venerated sacrament of the Eucharist, entire Christ is contained in each kind, and in each several particle of either kind when separated, — let him be accursed."

Canon IV: "If any one shall say that, after consecration, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ is only in the wonderful sacrament of the Eucharist in use whilst it is taken, and not either before or after, and that the true body of the Lord does not remain in the hosts or particles which have been consecrated, and which are reserved, or remain after the communion, — let him be accursed."

Canon V: "If any one says that the principal fruit of the most holy Eucharist is the remission of sins or that other effects do not result from it, — let him be accursed."

Canon VI: "If any one shall say that Christ, the only begotten Son of God, is not to be adored in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, even with the open worship of latria, and therefore not to be venerated with any peculiar festal celebrity, nor to be solemnly carried about in processions according to the praiseworthy and universal rites and customs of the holy Church, and that He is not to be publicly set before the people to be adored, and that His adorers are idolaters, — let him be accursed."

THE Ph.D. EXPERT IN THESE MATTERS GOES ON TO SAY...

VATICAN II UPHOLDS TRENT

Vatican II began in 1962 and ended in 1965. Some two thousand, five hundred bishops, and each with his committee of theologians, worked the greater part of four years, and spent between forty and sixty million dollars. Dozens of resolutions, called "Schemae," were passed, hundreds of similar ones were rejected, and thousands were proposed, most of which were reported in newspapers around the world. At the third session, the Council produced Sacrosanctum Concilium (The Holy Liturgy). One of its articles entitled "The Mystery of the Eucharist'' completely reaffirmed its belief and practice in the material changing of the bread and wine at the mass into the very body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. It was not long thereafter that Pope Paul VI issued an encyclical, Mysterium Fidei, which reads in part: "During the Second Vatican Council the Church has made a new and most solemn profession of her faith in and worship of this mystery...For if the sacred liturgy holds the first place in the life of the Church, the mystery of the Eucharist stands as the heart and center...Those who partake of this sacrament in Holy Communion eat the Flesh of Christ and drink the Blood of Christ, receiving both grace, the beginning of eternal life, and the 'medicine of immortality,'... Indeed, we are aware of the fact that, among those who deal with this Most Holy Mystery in written or spoken word, there are some who...spread abroad such opinions as disturb the faithful and fill their minds with no little confusion about matters of faith as if everyone were permitted to consign to oblivion doctrine already defined by the Church, or to interpret it in such a way as to weaken the genuine meaning of the words or the approved import of the concepts involved...the spread of these and similar opinions does great harm to the faith and devotion to the Divine Eucharist... we cannot approve the opinions which they express...We must therefore approach this mystery especially with humble obedience, not following human arguments, which ought to be silent...

The Vatican continues...

The Catholic Church has always offered and still offers the cult of latria to the Sacrament of the Eucharist...We therefore beseech you, venerable brothers...Tirelessly promote the cult of the Eucharist.

... "May the Most Blessed Virgin Mary, from whom Christ Our Lord took the flesh which under the appearances of bread and wine 'is contained, offered, and received in this Sacrament,' and all the saints of God, especially those who had a more ardent devotion to the Divine Eucharist, intercede with the Father of mercies so that from this same faith in, and devotion to the Eucharist, may come forth and flourish a perfect unity among all who bear the name Christian." Thus Pope Paul VI reaffirmed his loyalty to those canons of Trent, the latter of which exhorted curses for those who deny them. Every Roman Catholic, under pain of mortal sin and excommunication is obliged to render religious worship to the host.

MY OWN THOUGHTS: It does not appear to be an enormous jump to "accept as true" the preposterous tenets advanced by Q-anon, does it? Asking others to believe in the 'improbable' is not without consequence...

THAT, MY FRIENDS, IS HOW WE GOT TO 'THE BIG LIE'