A Church Full of Hypocrites

"There is a huge difference in a church that is full of hypocrites and a church that is full of heretics. A church full of hypocrites is one that teaches truth and the believers fail to live up to the truth they believe. A church full of heretics do not teach the truth but lies. 

Although a church full of heretics looks very nice and is full of tolerance, I would rather be among hypocrites that tell me the truth." Teresa Beem

My notes on the exchange between Al Kresta and his guest Scott Hahn:

The “New Testament” found in scripture doesn’t refer to a collection of books. (Late second-century Bishop Ireneaus was the first to use the New Testament as a collection of writings. It wasn’t common until the end of the 4th century.)

Up until that time the “new covenant” or the “new testament” was used by the early Christians for the Eucharist or Lamb’s supper.  The New Testament was the giving of the divine life, through the Son of God offered to us on Calvary in the mass sacrifice.

The books came to be known as the New Testament only because they were used during the mass--they were what was being read from during the sacrifice. So Christians began to call them New Testament readings, which eventually the books took on the name of the sacrifice. The books that told of this New Covenant with God and man, in Christ’s blood, were read in mass and eventually took on the mass’ name.

Never does the New Testament call itself the New Testament. That name is a Christian tradition. Let’s see what the Bible refers to when it records the meaning of the New Testament:

The Cup of Blood at Christ’s Passover 

The only time that Jesus ever used the working “New Testament” was in context of the sacrifice and the cup of the Passover celebration.

For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Matt. 26:28, See also Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20

After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. I Cor. 11:25 (written c. AD 50’s. Earliest reference to “New Testament.”)

New Testament as Will (not as book)

Who also hath made us fit ministers of the new testament, not in the letter but in the spirit. 2 Cor. 3:6

I will perfect, unto the house of Israel and unto the house of Judah, a new testament: Heb. 8:8

Christ’s Atonement and Shedding of Blood 

And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions...Heb. 9:15

And to Jesus the mediator of the new testament, and to the sprinkling of blood which speaketh better than that of Abel. Heb. 12:24

When the Apostles proclaimed the New Covenant/Testament gospel to the world and people accepted Christ as their Lord and Savior, they didn’t read the New Testament. He didn’t say to write this in remembrance of me. Jesus told them to do the New Covenant in remembrance of me.

This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. I Cor. 11:25

The Bible, on its own terms, refers to the New Testament as a sacrament long before it became a document. The New Testament Bible really points to the Lord’s Supper.

IS CHRISTIAN AUTHORITY REALLY BASED ON ANY SOLA?

Catholic: Is the Word of the Father authoritative to the Christian?

Protestant: Of course.

Catholic:  Is the Word of the Jesus authoritative to the Christian?

Protestant: Yes. Both the Father and the Son are God. They are both authoritative.

Catholic: Is the Word of the Holy Spirit authoritative to the Christian?

Protestant: Yes, Christians believe in the Trinity, three persons in one God. They are all authoritative.

Catholic: What if I were to say to you, “My authority is Pater Solus or a Father alone. I don’t go to Jesus or the Spirit. I go straight to the Father. He is my final authority and I check out all that Jesus says or the Spirit says through the Father.” What would you say?

Protestant: I don’t understand the point. Jesus and the Father are one so they are not going to disagree. 

Catholic: But if they do disagree. I’m not going to Jesus, I am going to the Father. 

Protestant: What are you saying? That the Father and Son might disagree?

Catholic: No.The Trinity is our authority. There is no conflicts between them. Even though there are three final authorities, no Christian would see a problem with this.

Protestant: So?

Catholic: So, like the Trinity itself being our final authority, Christians also have three voices or sources of the Word of God that are authoritative: The Bible, Tradition and the Magisterium. All three of these are the Word of God revealed to us. The Bible is the written word, the Tradition is the oral word and the Magisterium is the living word. So, the earthly authority reflects the heavenly authority. It is three working in unison rather than any one or “sola” authority. 

The Dark Ages? Hardly-- They were the LIGHT Ages

CATHOLICS! BE ANNOYING!

Preach it MICHAEL!!

EWTN Question to Father Pacwa by Yours Truly....

My husband and I just took a pilgrimage to EWTN and were in the audience for the live television shows:

ETWN LIVE with Father Mitch Pacwa




AND Threshold of Hope also with Father Pacwa:



The reason for this blog is to give my perspective on the question I asked Father Mitch and his guest in the first video. I asked the second question (and the close up wasn't flattering.... I don't look like that in real life....smile....); my question is around the forty minute mark, but the full video is so good I hate for you to fast forward.

The question I asked was for my friend Ricky (currently in RCIA), "If Christ is truly present in the Eucharist why aren't Catholics more Christ-like?"

Since they didn't have time to ponder their answers, I think they answered it well enough, but I have been thinking about this since I was considering Catholicism way back in 2006 or 2007 and I want to give my personal answer to it. However, how truly Catholic my answer is, I just don't know.

Why Does the Eucharist Seem to be Impotent in Changing Catholics Lives?

I would answer this with other questions. Why could not Jesus Christ, Immanuel (God with us) perform miracles in some towns? 

And He could do no miracle there except that He laid His hands on a few sick people and healed them. And He wondered at their unbelief. Mark 6: 5, 6

Why were not the Jews, even the Apostles themselves, instantly changed by being with Christ day by day? After all, the "real presence" of Christ was there in the flesh, in the form of a human man, daily and few were miraculously changed into saints. In fact, I don't know of any who left Christ's presence on earth who were perfected by it. Zacchaeus promised to be better, and Jesus told the harlot to go and sin no more, and perhaps they were instantaneously changed by God, but we have no record of it.  

People walked amongst Christ day by day, heard His teachings and the miracle of His real presence changed only a few, gradually.

The Real Presence Then and Now

Just as the Jews were repulsed by the idea of God giving the world His true flesh and becoming one with us as a man, so are many Christians repulsed by the idea of God giving the world His true flesh and becoming one with us in bread and wine. Both are testing miracles. 

I am not saying that one cannot be saved outside of the Catholic Church. But just as the Jews were tested by the miracle of the human Christ, Immanuel, God with us; so too are we, His followers today, tested by the miracle of the Eucharist. 

JOHN 6: 31-71

"Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, 'He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.' " Jesus then said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world. Then they said to Him, "Lord, always give us this bread." Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life ..." Therefore the Jews were grumbling about Him, because He said, "I am the bread that came down out of heaven." ... "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 istrue 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."

" ...many of His disciples, when they heard this said, "This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?"... As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. So Jesus said to the twelve, "You do not want to go away also, do you?"

Today, we as Catholics have the presence of Christ with us in the Eucharist. We can stand before God as the Apostles did. And we too can reject the living bread and withdraw from Christ and walk with Him no more, even as mass-attending Catholics. 

Christ called His disciples to "do this in remembrance of me." That means we, as we partake in the sacrament, are to bring to our hearts this precious gift and allow it to change us. We are to actively invite Christ who knocks on our door, to enter and cleanse us of all sins. Jesus says to the lukewarm Christians:

"...you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked, I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire so that you may become rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness will not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes so that you may see. Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; therefore be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him." Revelation 3:17-20

When it comes right down to it, repenting is the biggest problem. We want faith only to believe, not faith enough to let Him in that He may rid us of our sins. We don't want to dine with Him for we are afraid of letting go of our sins. We tend to love them or at least depend on them. We cling to them and often it is very, very painful to let them go. 

The power of the Eucharist is not to magically make us hate sin, as if God is a type of Bewitched and all He does is twitch His nose and our sins are all gone. The Eucharist is a softening of our stubborn hearts, it is a gentle wooing us to love Him and let go of all things that harm us and others. This takes time, most of us, our entire lives.  So we cannot judge other Christians when they partake of the Eucharist. For receiving the True Presence is either making us more stubborn in our sins, or less. You are either drinking life or you are drinking wrath, God's immortality or God's damnation. It is either making you more clouded or Christ-like. And it is not automatic that you receive the life and immortality. That is your active choice.

This is the power of the Real Presence in the Eucharist. And always keep in mind that Protestants are watching you.....