Pope: Christians not taking “Eucharist” should regret

Especially during the week of prayer, he said, Christians should feel “regret for the impossibility” of sharing the Eucharist.

The Pope display the sun and a crescent moon in the Eucharist, paganism from A to Z around a false Messiah.

The Pope in Rome wants to unite all Christian’s around the Roman Catholic celebration of the eucharist. This is what the Catholic Herald has quoted the Pope saying in an Vatican audience attended by 2.500 people.

“Especially during the week of prayer, Christians should feel regret for the impossibility of sharing the Eucharist”.

The Pope also underlined that the Vatican see the Eucharist as the very religious ritual where “Christ makes him self present”.

“The third element is participating together in “the breaking of the bread,” in which Christ makes himself present, the Pope said.

Sharing the Eucharist is the sign of fully sharing faith, which is why the Catholic Church insists that divided Christians cannot normally share Communion”  the Pope said.

Source: Catholic Herald.

My reply:

The Pope should regret that the Roman Catholic Church is not teaching correctly about the breaking of bread. That is why millions of Christians do not want to join him.

If Rome does not change its teachings, true born again Christians will never brake bread with Catholics.

The Pope teach that Jesus is physically present in the bread at the alter. That is not the truth.  Jesus is not in the Catholic bread. You do not become a born again Christian by eating a round wafer in a Catholic Church.

Jesus is to be found in the Word. He is the Word that became flesh. Jesus became a man, not a piece of bread.  The Pope twists the Word of God, and force Catholic to follow not Biblical cannon laws and dogmas,

When we brake bread we do this in remembrance of the teachings of Jesus. We we drink of the cup, we remember his death on the cross. Only by the blood he shed 2.000 years ago, man can be cleansed from sins and be saved.

The Pope’s doctrine that man accept Jesus by eating him, is a funny form of cannibalism. I will surly never participate in such a wicked ritual.

Paul warns us of dire consequences if I do:

1. Corinthians 11:26-30
For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup.

For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep.

(end of scripture).

Another issue is the symbolism around the Eucharist.

Who told the Pope to put the round wafer into a sun, and use an Islamic crescent moon to hold it up inside the golden holder?

Read more about this pagan inspired religious ritual.

Stay out of Roman Catholic Churches.

Written by Ivar

Advertisements

41 thoughts on “Pope: Christians not taking “Eucharist” should regret

  1. hi
    Protestant also break the bread in remembrance of
    his last supper.Is it right? i believe we can
    break the bread in remembrance of his last supper.do you believe this is against bible teaching???
    i’d like to know your comment regarding this subject.
    regards
    tony.

    1. How do you explain this in John 6?

      “53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” 59 He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.
      60 On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”
      61 Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you?”

      I am an evangelical. But after reading the Church fathers, I have come to accept the catholic view of the Eucharist / Communion. We have a very low view of what communion is in protestant Christianity, and we replace it with bibledolatry.

      1. Dear J.B

        Shalom, and love in Jesus.

        You wrote:

        We have a very low view of what communion is in protestant Christianity, and we replace it with bibledolatry….

        My reply:

        This is an amazing statement. Do you feel the Jews ate their God, since he must have came down in the desert, mixed into the “manna” from Heaven?

        Have you seen any Evangelical Christians eat a physical Bible? Or have you seen Evangelical Christians bow before the Bible, and cover it with flowers? And started to claim the book is God?

        What about an Evangelical Christian proclaiming: Every page is “holy”. Let us worship the high quality of paper?

  2. Dear Tony,
    Breaking bread in remembrance is different than believing the bread IS GOD. Catholics believe the bread is turned into God Himself. The same Lord than hung on the cross.The RCC believes that you have no life within you unless you eat God.
    Sue

    1. *THE CATHOLIC CHURCH *

      Before 1517, every Christian was Catholic.

      As such, today we know that:

      If you are Lutheran then your Church was founded by Fr Martin Luther in Germany in 1517.

      If you are Menonite, your Church was founded by Grebel, Mantz and Blaurock, in 1525.

      If you are Anglican, then your Church was founded by King Henry XIII in 1534.

      If you are a Presbyterian, then your Church was founded by John Knox in 1560.

      If you are a Congregationalist, then your Church was founded by Robert Brown, in Holland in 1583.

      If you are Baptist, then your Church was founded by John Smith in Amsterdam, in 1606.

      If you are a Methodist, then your Church was founded by John Murray in New Jersey, in 1770.

      If you are a Mormon or Latter Day Saint, then your church was founded by Joseph Smith in New York, in 1829.

      If you are a Seven Day Adventist, your Church was founded by William Miller in 1831.

      If you are Salvation Army, then know that your Church was founded by William Booth in 1865.

      If you are Jehovah Witness, then know that your Church was founded by Charles Russell in 1872.

      Here at home:

      If you are Redeemed Christian Church of God, then you know that you were founded in 1952 by Josiah Akindayomi.

      If you are a member of Deeper Life Bible Church, then you were founded by Pastor William Kumuyi in Lagos in 1973.

      If you are Mountain of Fire, then you were founded by Dr. Daniel Olukoya in 1989.

      we can go on and on…

      APART FROM THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, EVERY OTHER ECCLESIA ASSEMBLY (CHURCH) WAS FOUNDED BY A HUMAN BEING. WE WERE FOUNDED BY JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF (Matthew 16:18), BEGINNING WITH THAT OFFICIAL GATHERING AT PENTECOST (Acts 2:1) AND LED BY 266 SUCCESSORS OF SAINT PETER.

      I have listed these not to denigrate anyone but just to set the records straight.
      The Catholic Church has remained where it has been since Christ instituted the Eucharist, called the Last Supper.
      We continue to do over and over what He commanded when He uttered those holy words over the bread and cup, take and eat, take and drink and ordered them to do this in His Memory
      until He comes again (Mt. 26:26).

      The word CATHOLIC means UNIVERSALITY.

      THIS IS WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE REPRESENT. Spread the Good News

    2. Taking all of Holy Scripture in context, how do you explain:

      I Cor 11:27 Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.

      Also, grammatically it is a false comparison. Look at some of the “I am” statements:

      “I am the vine.”
      “I am the gate.”

      God, the subject, compares himself to something ordinary, the predicate nominative, to illustrate something about himself. By comparing himself to a vine, he is saying that he brings us life and nourishment. By comparing himself to a gate, he is saying that he is the only entrance to heaven. He is using mundane objects to make his identity concrete.

      However, now look at the statement, “This (the bread) is my body.”

      Now bread is the subject and God is the predicate nominative. This should mean that, if we are speaking figuratively, the predicate nominative – God – is being used to describe a quality of bread. So now, if this is figurative, he is describing a mundane object as divine, which is idolatry. See the silliness of this below if I turn the metaphors into similes.

      God is like a vine. (makes sense)
      God is like a gate. (makes sense)
      This bread is like a God. (huh?)

      If you want to make the argument that, because Christ often spoke metaphorically, he was doing so during the last supper, then they should find other examples of where Christ is walking around and “metaphorically” calling other mundane objects god-like.

      But at the last supper, the choice of words and structure do not support the pattern that you suggest.

  3. Once in college, before I became a Believer and had NO IDEA about these things, I had a Catholic friend who took me to church with her one Sunday (looking back on it, it’s obvious that she was interested in me, but religion wasn’t the only thing I was hopelessly blind about back then.)

    Anyway, we get there and there’s all these rituals and pronouncements that I was totally mystified by because I’d never read anything about any of them in the Bible, and then they were going to do this ritual called “Eucharist” and I got up to go to the front along with my friend and we get there and the priest looks at me sternly but not unkindly and asks;

    “Are you Catholic my son”?

    “Uh…not really.”

    “Than this is not for you. Please sit down and if you want I can speak to you about this after the service.”

    I went and sat down, but instead of feeling embarrassed or angry (my default feeling in those post adolescent days) I felt tremendous relief. I didn’t know why, but this ceremony was one I was glad I had had an excuse not to take part in.

    If I’d only known what danger I’d avoided!

    1. How could you get up to go receive communion when you do not even know what it is and the implications of receiving it unworthily? You guys are just clowns

  4. BTW,Det ser så pent ut når paven sier: ”Fellesskap med Gud skaper fellesskap oss imellom og må nødvendigvis uttrykkes i konkret fellesskap” (og dermed deling av godene) ”Ingen i fellesskapet skal gå sultne, eller trenge å være fattige. Dette er en grunnleggende plikt.” Det er faktisk også grunnleggende sosialisme – og hvis det var sant fra DRKKs side – hvorfor er de da så rike – mens så mange katolikker er så fattige?

    It looks very nice when Josef Ratzinger says: “Communion with God creates communion among us and must necessarily be expressed in concrete communion,” and sharing with one another. “No one in the community should be hungry, should be poor. This is a basic obligation,”, it is also basic socialism, and if it were really true, why then is the Roman Church so filthy rich, and so many Roman Catholics so extremely poor?

  5. One last comment, the Pope would never say that if you are not Roman Catholic You are not Christian. That is just again more propagenda perpetuating your hatred.

  6. Dear Chris,
    What he did say is that if you disagree with ecumenism (meaning all Christian denominations turning to Rome and converting to Catholicism), then you do not trust God. Who is judging who? A few years back, the Pope said all protestant churches are NOT really churches, unless they have the eucharist..they are only to be considered ecclesiastical communities.
    Since leaving Catholicism, I can tell you, the ‘protestant’ churches I have gone to are REAL churches which exemplify the love of Christ 5 million times more than the Catholic Church because of Christ being IN the BELIEVER, AND NOT THE BREAD.
    You see, when Jesus lives inside of you (the Holy Spirit) you already have Him in you. The Catholic church says you need to EAT GOD to have Him in you.
    When you believe on HIM and His word, He lives in you and you don’t need to have more God in you by eating God.
    The Holy Spirit is then alive in you guiding you to all truth and living through you. That’s what it means to be “in Christ”. The church says you need to eat Christ in order to have life. But to have life, is to believe on His atonement for our sins which was completed on the cross 2000 years ago.It’s a finished work.
    I hope this helps, Chris. There is no hatred going on here. Wishing you God’s grace and peace,
    Sue

    1. Iiiivarrrr, sincerely I’m not sure you were ever a Catholic, describing receiving communion as eating God is making gest. You guys are just too personal for. You are making gest of the actual words of Jesus in John 6. You rebroadcast statements in such as way as to get attention of poor unenlightened people, playing on people’s intelligence. This were the exact issues with the ones that mistook Jesus for calling them cannibals. Even the disciples know that the teaching was hard. Let’s fear God and stop misinterpreting things for our personal gains. Ordinarily, I would have stopped making comments on this site but for the people that you may mislead, I decided to keep at it countering all your lies here. I know you are a pastor, but, sincerely, it is really unfortunate what you do to get people on your side by all means.

  7. First, thank you for your response.

    Second, there are thousands of reasons why I’m Catholic all amounting to 1, that Catholicism is true. I do not belong to Catholicism because of how faithful the people are within the Church. And I do not doubt that there are loving people within the protestant churches, because in no way do I believe they un-Christian.

    As a person who is not only “catholic” but more of an expert than most in terms of an education in that area, I think I can tell you that unfortunately you are making some unfortunate leaps of logic.

    The Pope, in saying that a person who does not strive for ecumanism is not in tune with a true Christian, scriptural faith. Why? Because we are called to be one, clinging to sound doctrine and the traditions passed down to us. This means that, if you are Catholic and not striving for unity with others, than you are not a “true Catholic-Christian” and the same thing applies to protestants. The underlying principle is that we ought to seek for unity. Everything you put into brackets is your own misapplication of what he is saying. The Pope is speaking about a disposition that is within each Christian – in other words, we should all be free in our heart and mind to allow ourselves to be corrected if we are holding to wrong doctrine, and thus ascribe to what is true. I hardly see anything unChristian about that.

    As for the Eucharist, I suggest reading over John 6 where Christ discusses how his flesh is real food and his blood is real drink. In verse 6:66 the majority of people leave Christ – which is unheard of anywhere else in the Gospel. The word “eat” used in the greek hear is not the typical “eating” word that is often employed in scripture that can be interpreted symbolically. Rather St. John chooses the word “eat” which reffers to a type of “gnawing” – it is a very graphic term that people would apply to animals in a farm doing – a very sober vision of eating.

    Notice that in the Gospel of John, when Christ expresses something in a symbolic fashion (i.e. the building up of the temple in three days) when people become confused he explains the analogy so that people will not leave him behind because of misunderstanding. Yet, Christ says in John 6, “Will you also leave me too?” And the Apostles say, “This is a difficult teaching who can believe it?”

    Furthermore Christ says at the Last Supper: “This is my body” He doesn’t say that this is a “symbol of my body.”

    Its key to realize that here Jesus is offering a sacrifice of Calvary which is not done over and over and over again, but rather the all sufficient sacrifice of Christ on Calvary is forward and made present. In other words, the Eucharist brings forth the very moment of Christ’s passion on the Cross, something many Catholics are not taught.

    When we are at mass we are before the very cross of Christ, participating in His sacrifice, since those who do not drink my blood and eat my flesh have no life within them.

    I hope that helps “flesh” some things out. As for whether it is cannibalism, it would only be so if our bodies digested God’s own flesh. But since once the accidents of the bread dissolve, so the presence disappears as well; yet the grace remains. The Eucharist is something I can say has made a profound effect on my life. God’s gift of love is so profound, his Cross so beautiful and it is the only reality that keeps me trusting in His all-sufficent sacrifice.

  8. ONe more thing I would like to add here is that Jesus is the “Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the World.” This statement to many people can often mean that “Jesus is gentle” – but to the Jews it meant one thing and one thing alone, it had something to do with the temple and the sacrifices offered there. Jesus is the sacrifical lamb.

    The Jewish tradition to kill the lamb involved a consuming of some of the meat in the sin-offering. The lamb would take on the sins of the sinner, and then be killed. Its blood sprinked around the sanctuary, and upon the people. We see this vividly in the Cross. But a major part of it would be the consuming of that meat in order to complete the communication of sorrow for sin.

    Christ who is a priest, unites the Levitical Priesthood in being a Lamb, and the Melchez. priesthood in bread and wine. Both become one in Him, and present for throughout the past 2000 years.

    1. Dear Chris.

      Shalom.

      You wrote:

      Christ who is a priest, unites the Levitical Priesthood in being a Lamb, and the Melchez. priesthood in bread and wine.

      My reply:

      This is another doctrine made by men. Because there is no truth in this, completely not Biblical.

      Jesus has replaced the blood offerings, by offering His own blood. Once, and for all. The priesthood has also been changed, to include all His students. Please read the letter to the Hebrews. There is only One High priest, Jesus the Messiah. And The Holy Spirit do not need mediums. The Spirit of God lives in the Temple of all men, who have surrendered their life to the Son of God.

  9. Chris
    Ivar is correct. There is no uniting of the priesthood. In terms of John 6.. the whole
    Chapter refers eating and drinking to coming to Him and BELIEVING in Him. He said the flesh is of no avail. They still didn’t get it. Considering it was against Levitical law to drink blood..it’s crazy to think that is what he meant. If he held His own body in His hands at last supper there would be TWO incarnations which is heretical.

  10. Okay, but clearly his flesh is not the same to be considered as the worldly-flesh. There is an obvious equivocation going on here in terms of the scripture passage.

    And by saying its “crazy” all I can repeat is that “It is a difficult teaching to accept.” But it is not crazy whatsoever. The blood of christ is on the doors of my lips, allowing death to passover. I just feel so sorry that you are never going to be at the foot of the Cross as Catholics are.

    Anyways, the Pope’s point about the Eucharist is that, the supreme expression of union with God, that is the “Marriage Feast of the Lamb” is a cause of disunity.

    You guys are really off your rocker on this one. Try not to vilify the Pope and look at him as the Anti-Christ, you might actually begin to realize that you are calling the Spirit of Christ, Satan. I’d be careful of that.

    1. Dear Chris.

      Shalom.

      You wrote:

      The blood of christ is on the doors of my lips, allowing death to passover.

      My reply:

      If I cut a chicken, will you still drink this blood? Surely death will passover.

      Jesus did not cut his finger, and told you to drink his blood. He told us to remember his blood, that was going to be shed at Calvary Hill. A symbolic act was performed with His students. I can assure you, that no blood thirsty satanist was going to drink his blood at the site of the cross.

      Leviticus 3:17
      “‘This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live: You must not eat any fat or any blood.’”

      If the symbolic act during the last supper was the real blood of Jesus, that the blood at Calvary Hill is pointless. The Pope makes a mockery of the crucifixion. The physical blood He shed on the cross has no salvation power. And since the Law say we shall not drink physical blood, Jesus did not cut his finger, and made his students lawbreakers.

      What you just wrote is the same occult message, that has come out of Rome since the day the devil took over the control of the Papacy.

    2. God bless you Chris, they have resolved to castigate the church of christ here. You can imagine a site set up just to fight the Catholic Church, rather than spread the gospel and preach repentance. I just don’t understand why people are so personal with their statements.
      Chris don’t waste your time on this people, I have been dealing with them for over half a year now. Upon Ivar’s request, went as far as sending a video of Benny Hynn’s position on the eucharist and the Catholic Church, since only the penticostal mission holds the truth in their views, and till this very moment, no one has made a comment on same because they cannot accept that sacred truth even from renowned penticostal Pastor. Ivar, you are responsible for everyone you mislead and you’ll face the consequences of your actions, this is the second time I’m warning you.

  11. And it is completely biblical to suggest that Christ unites the levitical priesthood with the Melch. priesthood. Melch didn’t offer any living sacrifice, Christ did.

    The whole reason Hebrews spoke of how there was no longer any levitical priesthood (which Catholics would agree with) is because at the time the Christians had to rid themselves of the customs they had become comfortable with, such as the day of attonment. As they began to lose their customs the author of the Letter to the Hebrews wanted to insist that they hadn’t lost anything, by reminding them of their High-Priest who offered an all-sufficent sacrifice for the sins of many.

    Here is my biggest problem with protestants that accuse the Church of the things you guys do:

    You listen to everything the Catholic Church teaches through your “protesting-lense” which enters into the dialogue with presuppositions of antagonism and biggotry. Perhaps you should study what the Church teaches from a Catholic rather than listen to anti-Cathoic rhetoric. Be assured, I have a deep respect for many forms of protestantism, but what I do not have respect for is the objectionable accusations you place over Catholics that demonstrate a total lack of understanding.

    You are absent – the Cross is present at every mass, and like the disciples that betrayed Christ out of fear and ignorance, you are not present at the sacrifice. That should bother you shouldn’t it? And calling it a “man’s tradition” is just a dumb argument. You wouldn’t know what a Man’s tradition would be if it was present in your own life. Protestantism in its totality is a man’s tradition. Catholicism is the exact opposite. We hold fast to the traditions that have been passed unto us.

    man this discussion makes me so miserable.

    1. Dear Chris.

      Shalom.

      You are free to have your opinions, and as usual when papists writes comments, they are free from Bible verses.

      Please take a look at this link:

      https://ivarfjeld.wordpress.com/category/vatican-skulls-and-bones/

      What should have been reserved for a horror movie, is blessed and ordained by the Pope. If you want to continue to support this tasteless, corrupt religious movement, that is your choice. No one will ever force you to understand, and obey the truth.

  12. Chris,
    The law of accidents was taken from Greek pagans (Aristotle) and even proved to be unscientific. The Church uses this unscientific theory to prove the eucharist is real flesh hidden under accidents.
    I wouldn’t be so cocky. I studied at a well known university and took a classes from a well known apologists I am sure you know but would rather not name.
    Ivar and myself are not absent at the cross.He paid the debt for all sinners 2000 years ago. The bill has been paid. The Catholic church says the bill still needs to be paid here and in purgatory and the only way to do that is the Mass. That in itself says that what He did 2000 years ago wasn’t enough and it needs to be repeated over and over. Wrong. His blood was enough which is why He said “It is finished” . He sits at the right hand of God to show it is finished. But the RCC says it’s not finished and repeats it every day for the “remission of sins”.

    1. Dear Sue and Chris

      Shalom.

      Sue wrote:

      But the RCC says it’s not finished and repeats it every day for the “remission of sins”.

      My reply:

      If you look to Papal dogma in general, they all mock the Word of God. In particular the Eucharist, the ongoing sacrifice of Jesus, and Roman Catholic eating his flesh and drinking his blood every day. They do this, in stead of Obeying the Word, and accepting that the blood of Jesus has been shed Once and for all. The Catholic clergy accuses Jesus of lying, saying it is “not finished”. The Catholic mass is sin from A to Z, blasphemy.

  13. In the 6th chapter of John, Jesus talked about His flesh and blood. The Jews couldn’t receive what He said because in Leviticus it says,

    Lev 17:10 And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.
    Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
    Lev 17:12 Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.

    They also may not taken to the idea of eating human flesh, either raw or cooked.

    The Catholic church has gone the opposite way and made a way to eat flesh and drink blood. Both missed the point that Jesus made at the end.

    Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

    If you read the words in the letter it appears that Jesus wants you to eat His flesh and drink His blood. The same way if you read about Him being a door or a rock or whatever else, you can make serious mistakes, if you go too far with it. Listen again.

    Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

    Why would Jesus tell you to eat His flesh, then tell you “the flesh profiteth nothing”? Because,

    “….the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.”

    This is a spritual partaking not a carnal one.

    1. Hahahahaha, how I feel for you! You are really a baby, you need a crash course on Bible knowledge.
      You see this is my point, people without any tenable knowledge of the bible, just want to be heard even where they should long to learn. It’s really unfortunate.
      Ivar, I have just identified a sheep you are leading astray.

  14. This is not a matter of eating God. I think you are wrong in what you think. Catholics, make the Eucharistic Celebration through the explicit command of Jesus; “Do this in rememberace of me” which meaning must be understood in the hebrew mentality of the word zachar – rememberance…were in the passover meal this word is used in the sense “that every jews must see himself being driven out of Egypt. Therefore Jesus is truly present in the bread and wine for he said; “This is my body”…”This is my blood” and in John chapter 6 than all this is more clear when he speaks clearly about his body and blood…eat my flesh and drink my blood so you will live. And infact even at that time Jesus found who left him for he said so, but he said to the apposles; “If you want, you can also go.”

    And than what about the Eucharistic Miracles…seems you have answer for everything. How do you explain these miracles, especcially that of Lanciano? one drop is of equal weight of 5 altogether, or the flesh as part of the ventricle of the heart as secular scientists also observed in there scientific research!

  15. Blasphemous they think they digesting and drinking the blood of Jesus, that’s a wrong teaching believing that once those wafer and bread are consecrated miraculous changed into boody and blood of jesus

  16. Jesus simply broke the bread and passed it out to everybody, symbolic of his body being broken on the cross. But he didnt sacrifice it on an altar or do any strange mysterious rituals with it. It seems like what the Catholics sacrifice it to idols and they leave the bread whole. Pure spirit of disobedience in the catholic church.

    1 cor 11:24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

  17. What a fantastic article, finally some truth amongst all the lies and errors on the internet. We can access God through prayer and Bible study. God does not dwell in the heart of the catholic priests, the pope or any of their pagan shrines. God’s blessings to you all, long live Protestantism!

    1. True that Jesus did say that. But did He appoint priests and popes to administer it like idolatry, surrounded by jewels preaching some perverted literal meaning?

      He said do this in rememberance of me and broke bread and passed it around. It was symbolic. Anybody with bread and wine could do it, but the Catholic Church wants to make everybody their slaves, as if they all must come to them for salvation.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s