I'm a convert and visited my old Protestant church for family reasons last year. I was blown away by the sheer lack of *something*. It was like the building existed in a weird vacuum. I was so thankful that the Holy Spirit guided me home to the Catholic Church.
I agree with this. My wife is a Protestant and to support her, I sometimes attend her services with her. I always come away thinking to myself, wow what a desiccated thing that was.
Amen! I also agree. I am currently converting (from Protestant to Catholic), and when I started attending mass, I would also go to my previous church because at first I thought I still needed to be around the familiarity of the environment, the music, the people, the pastor, etc. But then I simply stopped going back after a few weeks. Don't misunderstand me, there was nothing wrong per se... but it just seemed..."watered down" (I truly don't mean this to be offensive- it's simply the only metaphorical words that occur to me to describe the difference that I feel). A Catholic mass is aimed entirely toward worshiping God- it is such a reverent and solemn experience, and it engages all the senses.
Father Mike was my guide as i was converting from protestantism to Catholicism last year...I remember watching a lot of his videos..Father Mike God bless you a lot for your homilies which forever changed my view on Catholicism..your videoes inspired me to be full and serious Catholic..
As a Protestant who is converting to Catholicism, hearing videos like these is amazing. I admit that transubstantiation/real presence was something that I questioned at first, but then I read that scripture of John 6 in a very attentive/analytical way (in different translations and even in the original Greek). I re-read it several times and no matter how I tried to argue within myself that maybe it is perhaps just symbolic, I always came to the conclusion- no- Jesus meant exactly what he said! It's one of those situations where you have already heard something before and so you think you know all about it, but then you suddenly come to truly understand and accept it- an epiphany! Why did I never accept it before now? It's unmistakable! Since this video is just an extract, I don't know if Father Mike goes on to explain further, but the rest of that passage still keeps emphasizing it more- after Jesus asks "does this offend you?", He goes on to say: "the words I have spoken to you- they are full of the Spirit and life. Still, there are some of you who do not believe." So here, He was directly calling out the doubters- essentially saying something like "Sheesh, come on now- I have already told you several times that it is my flesh and my blood- how many times must I say it? Why don't you believe me?" Not only that, after many of the disciples don't accept it and abandon Him, Jesus even goes further and tests his own chosen disciples- verse 67: "'You do not want to leave too, do you?' Jesus asked the Twelve."(NIV) and in verse 68-69: "Simon Peter answered Him, 'LORD, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God.'" So, not only does Jesus repeat it again and again and again, and emphasize it with "truly, truly," and challenge his new followers to believe His "difficult teaching," and lets them get offended by it so they leave, no- not only all that- in addition, He even goes as far as to potentially allow his personally-chosen twelve apostles to abandon Him if they don't agree with it! Obviously, it's that important- so much so that He doesn't care if his followers and primary disciples abandon Him over it- He really means it!
@@user-fi1pe4dg3u Hmm, I must disagree- according to normal usage of the word "convert" in the English language, one can certainly "convert to a religion." In fact, "convert to a religion" is such a common collocation that if a random native English speaker were prompted to complete the phrase "convert to ________", he/she would likely intuitively fill in the blank with the word "religion" or a specific choice- e.g. "Christianity," "Islam," etc. If you don't think so, I wonder which word you would personally use to describe, for example, someone who switches from Hinduism to Islam or from Buddhism to Christianity... Would you not use the word "convert" in that situation?? And as for "converting to Jesus"...well, I personally have never used that phrase before (nor heard anyone else express it). I suppose it could be used to describe someone who becomes a Christian (since Jesus is Christ), but it does sound a bit funny, to me at least, when I hear the phrase "convert to Jesus"... As for "converting to a denomination," I guess I partially agree with you (only partially though)- in this case, it simply depends on whether we wish to restrict the usage of the verb "convert" within a religious context to describe only a change from one distinct religion to another distinct religion (and not to apply it to a change from one branch of a religion to another branch within that same religion)- but I still feel that to impose that limitation of usage would be unnecessarily pedantic.
First of all, you should get yourself a Catholic Bible and get it blessed by a Priest! You will experience a big difference. When I first picked up a Protestant Bible afterwards it felt so empty! Because it is NOT the whole Bible! Also, once I started having visions in Mass on the Eucharist, I knew it was real presence of Jesus!
I'm 52 year old cradle catholic, and only in the past 2-3 years have I finally been able to grasp, accept, and believe that the eucharist IS Jesus. It wasn't until I was around 40 did I learn that our priests were speaking literally when they said the eucharist is Jesus and not meant just as a symbol! It's funny because it's easy to believe that Jesus rose from the dead, performed miracles, and multiplied bread and fish, etc...but it took me so long to believe that the eucharist is Jesus' body! To be fair, I always wanted to believe, but my brain could not wrap itself around the idea as fact. I thank God that the scales have fallen from my eyes and I now believe the truth.
My uncle is a wealthy protestant preacher in Tennessee. I knew right away that my Catholic faith was the one true religion when he said he was thinking about moving to Dallas because it was a “better market”. 😅 Praying for all our protestant brothers and sisters always 🫶
Hey FR. Mike I liked this talk, I just wish you wouldn’t have skipped verses 63-65, as those are the verses that Indicate to me that Jesus was speaking in metaphor not literal.
Pray That I Will Conquer My Sinful Tendencies Flee Evildoers Pray The Rosary The Divine Mercy Prayer To St Michael Stations Of The Cross Memorare To St Joseph Poor Souls In Purgatory All My Priest Friends For The Pope
"The bread I give..." I don't think he was referring to eucharyst in that particular passage. I think he was referring to himself and the salvation he offers. Similarly to how he referred to being "born again" and Nicodemus was wondering about literal birth.
TAKE JESUS AT HIS WORD: WHEN JESUS SAID, “THE FATHER IS THE ONE TRUE GOD,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 17:3). WHEN JESUS SAID “HE CAME TO DO THE WILL OF HIS FATHER AND TO FINISH HIS WORK,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 4:34). WHEN JESUS SAID THAT “GOD GAVE HIM LIFE,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 5:26). WHEN HE SAYS, “HE CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 5:30). WHEN JESUS SAYS “HE HAS NOT SPOKEN OF HIMSELF BUT OF THE FATHER WHO SENT HIM,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 12:49-50). WHEN HE SAYS, “HE WILL SHOW US PLAINLY OF THE FATHER,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 16:25). WE MUST BELIEVE JESUS BECAUSE HE IS THE ONLY WAY TO BE WITH THE FATHER (JOHN 14:6).
Love the insight on where the there is proof the eucharist is in the bible. I'm assuming Jesus give this ability to his apostles and in doing so, they passed onto other disciples/apostles. Where I struggle is where in the Bible does it say only priests can convert bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. If we are all disciples of Christ, why can't we bless bread and wine ourselves?
I have been a Catholic for 70. Yes, and when I was young and went to mass, the priest never said body blood soul and vinity. He said body and blood. When was the word soul and divinity added to the consecration of the host? Could somebody please tell me the answer to this question? Thank you
Transubstantiation is opposed to one of the most basic teachings of the Bible, the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ, as noted at Matthew 20:28 and 1 Timothy 2:5,6. As the apostle Paul shows at Hebrews 9:22, “Unless blood is shed, there can be no remission of sins.” Transubstantiation involves an admittedly “bloodless sacrifice” (or “unbloody” as one commentator here wrote) and therefore cannot wipe out sins as claimed. Then too, Paul, at Hebrews ch. 9 and 10, repeatedly insists that Jesus Christ died only once, that only one sacrifice is needed. It is therefore a denying of Paul’s words to hold that other sacrifices are needed, and it is not biblical to hold that imperfect men can create the divine Christ afresh daily and sacrifice him. Paul distinctly shows that just as the high priest in Israel entered into the holy of holies with the blood of sacrificed animals to make atonement, so Jesus Christ entered heaven itself with the value or merit of his sacrifice to make atonement for his followers. No human priest could enter heaven to appear on behalf of others to obtain forgiveness for them, since “flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God.” 1 Corinthians 15:50. And if Jesus, by saying, ‘this is my body, my blood,’ miraculously changed the bread and wine into his very flesh and blood, performing the most noteworthy miracle of his ministry, surely this would not only have been explicitly stated but made paramount throughout the Christian Greek Scriptures. But transubstantiation is not even mentioned, let alone discussed, because it is not a fact but only fiction. It is not taught in the Bible. The belief in transubstantiation has done much harm. It fosters idolatry in that both priests and people adore the “host” as the body of Christ upon the priests’ saying, “Hoc est autem corpus meum,” and then ringing a bell. In holding that only an ordained priest can perform the sacrifice of the mass and pronounce the words of consecration the people are made wholly dependent upon their priests for forgiveness of sins. Truly reason, the facts and the Scriptures unite to prove that the Bible does not teach transubstantiation. It’s pure fiction IMHO.
Read John 6 to V 63. His words are spirit n only the Spirit gives life. V63 is the explanation of ch6. Who turns the bread n wine to physical body n blood? Some special guy they call father in spite of the Lord saying clearly to call no man father, as we have one father who is in heaven The pride of man is His downfall. In n out the church.
Is the book of Hebrews in the Catholic Bible? I ask because Catholics teach the exact opposite of what Hebrews teaches. Chapter 7:26-28, and10:11-18 for examples.
Father Mike. As always-- Thanks for your efforts to explain the faith. It is good that people are at least making the effort-- but please stop calling things true that can be interpreted many ways. You and I can believe what we want but the Catholic interpretation of scripture is not the only one- and Jesus did speak symbolically much of the time. Some one can easily point out where the hosts and wine are made and say you are not being honest. Don't interpret the bible for everyone else. Just live it to the best of your ability.
Father Mike, The following comment is in reference to the video you put up One year ago in which you showed off your tattoo on the inside of your right wrist. My phone shut down while I was commenting, it was lost , so I searched for a more recent video. You very well know , Fr. Mike, Jesus , by His own words, came to fulfill the law , not change the law. So, your blatant misunderstanding of the teachings , from the old testament, on marking or cutting or tattooing your body , is not so. Particularly as a Catholic. Your understanding of the old testament is a Protestant stance. You are leading your flock astray. Jesus also proclaimed , to who much is given much will be expected. Why are you looking for validation from your youtube followers? YOU are the leader. You are not unhappy with the tattoo or you would have kept the fact to yourself. You have been tricked, by your own explanation. The fact you're asking for validation or comments proves you know it is NOT acceptable. Tattoos are very much a symbol of This WORLD,more so now then ever. Please don't tell me you are unaware of this. Why do Catholic Priest wear all black? As a visible sign to Christians and NON Christians , that by the vows you took at your Ordination, you are dead to the things of THIS WORLD. You are Jesus in the FLESH while presiding at His Alter. If you need to think of Jesus or be reminded of you love for Him, all that you need to do is look at your reflection in the mirror. Also your body , all our bodies ,are Temples of God. They are only on loan. I will pray for your soul , Fr. Mike. My older sister suggested I follow your Bible in a year study. The moment I opened the link and first saw you, I knew you were not fulfilled in your vocation nor at peace in proclaiming the Good News of Jesus. You were, and still appear to be in the the above video, one where you show off your tattoo, and several others I have attempted to watch in the past, talking much to much. Explaining every little thing you said. Fidgeting nervously. You need to go back to the Seminary, Fr. Mike. Doing what you did to God's Temple, as a 50 year old Priest, proves to me you clearly , you haven't worked out within yourself , what needed to be while you were in your formation. You were either not honest with your Superiors in Seminary or you were allowed to be Ordained before you should have been. Peace in Christ Jesus. May we all celebrate the birth of OUR LORD, Merry Christmas.❤
Mat 23:9 And don't call anyone on earth 'Father,' because you have only one Father, the one in heaven. Mat 23:10 Nor are you to be called 'Teachers,' because you have only one teacher, the Messiah! Mat 23:11 The person who is greatest among you must be your servant. Mat 23:12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. Now read john v63. It explains the body n blood. Don't be a catholic. Be a Christian, read n study your Bible n pray much. THATS COMMUNION WITH GOD. Not all the gobbledygook n fancy clothing etc in RC church.
We have to remember that what Jesus said in John 6 happened a year BEFORE the Lord’s Evening Meal was instituted! Jesus’ fleshly body was still intact when he offered this bread. If the bread and wine were changed into his flesh and blood during the Lord’s Evening Meal, then those partaking would be repeating that sacrifice. His sacrifice took place “ONCE for all time.” (Hebrews 9:25,26) If the apostles were really eating and drinking his literal flesh and blood, that would have been cannibalism and a violation of God’s law! (Genesis 9:3,4; Leviticus 17:10) And if they had been literally drinking Jesus’ blood, he wouldn’t have said that his blood “IS TO BE poured out,” indicating that his sacrifice was yet to occur. (Matthew 26:28) When Jesus said, “I AM the door” and “I AM the true vine,” no one thought that he was a literal door or a literal vine. (John 10:7; 15:1) Likewise, when The New Jerusalem Bible quotes Jesus as saying: “This cup IS the new covenant,” we don’t conclude that the cup itself was literally the new covenant. There can be no question that the bread meant, or symbolizes his body. Thus, the Charles B. Williams translation says: “This represents my body.” (Luke 22:19,20)
why Paul exhorted Corinthians to "discern the body and blood", as people eat and drank as if they were with hunger? why to call atention to forbbid public sinners to eat during this time in specific? beware of late translations, be more attached to the earliest ones from the firsts centuries. Also, His sacrifice took place “ONCE for all time.” (Hebrews 9:25,26), like you said, but people still sin to this day, so how is it posible that the world itself didnt changed but the grace of Jesus in the cross? The thing is, Jesus cannot fogive a sin that doesnt exist in current time, but every sin that existed. He justified every honest and just people before Him, including the "good thief", as everyone were bid to the old convenant. Jesuss new covenant will only work as the writter dies (Jesus himself), thats why we dont do circunsition, it was refined with the batism with water. Still, every time this memory of Him in the cross is done in paralelism of his last banquet with the 11 apostles, we are updating the effect of his grace, for our salvation, as humanity continues to sin... We cannot participate in something 2000 years ago, but Jesus give this opportunity by this update of His Grace. You dont clean your room because of the future dirts, but a true cleaning can put a old house into a new shape. You dont use antibiotics to treat a symtom that doesnt exist, but it will cleanse your body from a disease that is happening from days or even year latent into your body. Unless we think the salvation, seeing in his Body and Blood, as a vaccine, i would agree with your view from Hebrews 9, that its effect is current posterior to his Death. But, still, why do we still sin then? by lack of knowlegde? actually, one can know the bible, but to follow the ultimate commandment of "loving God with all force and all spirit, also loving the next one as loving self" its really hard. Once you lack patience with someone, even by a little bit, you sinned. But after the sin, what we do (or we should do)? ask forgivness. Whats the image that came into mind? His Death in the cross, the motive He did it, totally selfless, it makes we to repent sincerely. Then we ask forgivness. His grace with His merits in the Cross will work everytime we do this, if we dont, it wont happen. Its an active act, not pasive. We need to repent every day, we need to update His grace, if we dont, there is no salvation (lack of repetence doesnt lead to heaven, in other words). But it depends in our action, to repent and ask forgivness, it doenst need to be a physical act, even a thought is sufficient, as someone can do external acts without humilty and repetence from the heart. "Once for all time" refer from all time in past and present / current time, as future doesnt exist, thats the problem from this interpretation, also induces to accept the sin as a "fate", which is wrong, as we have a choice in the present. That's fundament of God's grace, as being saved by Him, while we ask for it. That's why men can stop sinning same sins as before (to stop gambling, to stop sodomy, to stop having sexual intercourse before and outside the matrimony, to stop doing false testmony, to stop stealing, etc). But if this could help you, the correlation done with the slain animals from old covenant laws are intrisicaly related to the figuration of the imolated lamb as Jesus Christ. As no animal was pleasant to God anymore (as the sins were reaching the heavens in number and the sacricifes were low or done without heart), His Son will suffice with infinite price and efficiency that no imolated animal could do, since any patriach that existed. And what God ordered tho those patriachs to do with the sacrifices? eat. This sounds terrific if applied to Jesus, but remember when 70+ discipules and man were with Him, and He said about eating him Flesh and Blood, they said "its too much" and disbanded until resting 12 apostles alone. Paul wasnt within those 12, but he believed until the point of exhorting the corithians, as i said before, with extreme respect to the elements of bread and wine. Thats a thing to reflect on, as many christians, from Iberic penisule to India, christian communities released rites to do this memory Jesus ordered to the 11 apostles in the first century, and historical documents and emphasises it, like from "Justin, the martyr" when asked by romans what christians in those reunions, at second century... The Malabar (siriac-malabar) rite in india, since 2000 years, to celebrate this memory of real Body and Blood of Jesus, despise not being the roman rite of Roman church, in other words, the "eucharisty is a invention of IV century theory" falls apart. And for us, christians, God and coincidences/casuality/accidents cannot coexist. To receive better grace than Jesus himself, there is no greater honor, even lacking of merit to receive it (but Jesus wants, and that suffices) as it confirms once again, every sin done so far will be cleansed from God's Justice, as the salary of the sin is the death. Jesus is Life himself. But, once again, no public sinners/ promoters of scandals, CANNOT enter the row of communion to receive Jesus himself, or they will receive their DAMNATION, instead of Life. This is also from Paul's exhortation for Corinthians and says much. Like, someone wanting the grace, but doesnt change the heart. Their praise to Lord is external, so He will puke those. Its historical belief and practice, those outside from the community also public sinners were fobbiden to receive Eucharisty, as it would be rather offense to Lord himself. Didnt you asked yourself why not all catholics receive communion, if its a common sense for them? Also why some catholic did trend topics at internet about the "scandal" of some import catholic politician receiving communion, while being a notorious pro-choice (favorable to abortion)? Again, the warning from Paul isnt being respected... Even worse if some stranger from the community to receive and "safe it" for whatever reasons. No one should do that, even less to touch it with barehands. But since the modernization from CVII, this value is being lost. If you compare any old rite with the Novus Ordus Mass, you see clearyly the lack of respect in many points... if God is present in the enviroment, shouldnt be the men more respectfull, without noisy instrument? The memory Jesus ordered wasnt supposed to be a contemplation, instead of a party?
No it's not look into eucharistic miracles. Have faith and believe. Many people left when he said est my flesh drink my blood. Many Christians love Jesus but yet don't have faith in John 6! I recommend looking into the eucharistic miracles. Godbless
@@empackmanmueller1725 it’s a demon not god doing those miracles n it’s symbolic not actual, Christ said to pluck your eye out to get to heaven are u gonna do that,he said he was a door does he have hinges he said he was a vine does he have branches n leaves, he said his body was a temple etc etc,Same thing his body and blood are bread and wine not literal
the mass/eucharist is a wicked ceremony, which re-sacrifices Christ millions of times, denying that Christ's death on the cross was enough for salvation. it supposedly empowers the roman catholic priesthood (only fully established in the 12th century) to actually make the wine and bread to be the actual blood and body of Christ. read john 6, the whole chapter. Jesus was speaking rhetorically. He was saying accept Him spiritually. it has NOTHING to do with the actual physical eating of His flesh and blood. where in the n.t. do His disciples actually eat His flesh or drink His blood? they don't. they follow Him! the roman catholic church is a false church based only partly on the bible, but more on man-made doctrines and practices.
Where is the proof? You just read the passage and put into it your own belief and what it means to you! 😂 This thing what the Roman Catholics call the doctrine of transubstantiation came out of the 3rd phase of the Tridentine or 1500+ years after Jesus gave the Apostles the instructions, if you will, about the Lord's supper. What you failed to consider is what did it mean to the first century Jew and not what the Roman Catholics interpret 1500+ years later.
All the ancient churches believe it is the body and blood of Christ, and there is no record of disagreement about it going all the way back, the difference is Orthodox say how it happens is a mystery. so you are completely wrong about your history
Look into eucharistic miracles. You have to believe and have faith. The miracles have happened where the eucharist turned into flesh from the left heart ventricle and is AB+ blood. Blessed carlos acutis created data base for people to see the miracles and learn more about them. Godbless
Why do people think Jesus is God? Because Jesus is God's interpreter. True believers must work together to correct the wrong that has been done. It is impossible for Jesus to be God when Jesus himself prayed to the Father saying, “and this is life eternal, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” (John 17:3). Jesus never bears witness of himself unless the Father commands him (John 5:31). God bears witness of Jesus through Jesus (John 12:49-50). God gave Jesus life; Jesus said “for as the Father has life in him, so has he given to the Son to have life in himself” (John 5:26). We must know them both in order to have eternal life. Why do people think Jesus is God? Because Jesus is God's interpreter. True believers must work together to correct the wrong that has been done. It is impossible for Jesus to be God when Jesus himself prayed to the Father saying, “and this is life eternal, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” (John 17:3). Jesus never bears witness of himself unless the Father commands him (John 5:31). God bears witness of Jesus through Jesus (John 12:49-50). God gave Jesus life; Jesus said “for as the Father has life in him, so has he given to the Son to have life in himself” (John 5:26). We must know them both in order to have eternal life.
@@user-rj8py9ld3j [John 6:22] onwards will answer all your questions my brother. and why lots of christians hate Catholics regarding the bread and wine. it is all in that chapter.
@@healhands5760 Right…who gave them the bread? "Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath *God the Father sealed."* (John 6:27) "Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but *my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven."* (John 6:32) So even in this context, Jesus still speaks of the Father and how it was GOD the Father who gives us the bread of life. Don’t take scripture out of context.
I'm a convert and visited my old Protestant church for family reasons last year. I was blown away by the sheer lack of *something*. It was like the building existed in a weird vacuum. I was so thankful that the Holy Spirit guided me home to the Catholic Church.
I agree with this. My wife is a Protestant and to support her, I sometimes attend her services with her. I always come away thinking to myself, wow what a desiccated thing that was.
Amen! I also agree. I am currently converting (from Protestant to Catholic), and when I started attending mass, I would also go to my previous church because at first I thought I still needed to be around the familiarity of the environment, the music, the people, the pastor, etc. But then I simply stopped going back after a few weeks. Don't misunderstand me, there was nothing wrong per se... but it just seemed..."watered down" (I truly don't mean this to be offensive- it's simply the only metaphorical words that occur to me to describe the difference that I feel). A Catholic mass is aimed entirely toward worshiping God- it is such a reverent and solemn experience, and it engages all the senses.
Welcome home!
Father Mike was my guide as i was converting from protestantism to Catholicism last year...I remember watching a lot of his videos..Father Mike God bless you a lot for your homilies which forever changed my view on Catholicism..your videoes inspired me to be full and serious Catholic..
Impressive speech Father. God bless you. 🙏🙏
As a Protestant who is converting to Catholicism, hearing videos like these is amazing. I admit that transubstantiation/real presence was something that I questioned at first, but then I read that scripture of John 6 in a very attentive/analytical way (in different translations and even in the original Greek). I re-read it several times and no matter how I tried to argue within myself that maybe it is perhaps just symbolic, I always came to the conclusion- no- Jesus meant exactly what he said! It's one of those situations where you have already heard something before and so you think you know all about it, but then you suddenly come to truly understand and accept it- an epiphany! Why did I never accept it before now? It's unmistakable!
Since this video is just an extract, I don't know if Father Mike goes on to explain further, but the rest of that passage still keeps emphasizing it more- after Jesus asks "does this offend you?", He goes on to say: "the words I have spoken to you- they are full of the Spirit and life. Still, there are some of you who do not believe." So here, He was directly calling out the doubters- essentially saying something like "Sheesh, come on now- I have already told you several times that it is my flesh and my blood- how many times must I say it? Why don't you believe me?" Not only that, after many of the disciples don't accept it and abandon Him, Jesus even goes further and tests his own chosen disciples- verse 67: "'You do not want to leave too, do you?' Jesus asked the Twelve."(NIV) and in verse 68-69: "Simon Peter answered Him, 'LORD, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God.'" So, not only does Jesus repeat it again and again and again, and emphasize it with "truly, truly," and challenge his new followers to believe His "difficult teaching," and lets them get offended by it so they leave, no- not only all that- in addition, He even goes as far as to potentially allow his personally-chosen twelve apostles to abandon Him if they don't agree with it! Obviously, it's that important- so much so that He doesn't care if his followers and primary disciples abandon Him over it- He really means it!
First of all you don’t convert to a religion or a denomination, you convert to Jesus.
@@user-fi1pe4dg3u Hmm, I must disagree- according to normal usage of the word "convert" in the English language, one can certainly "convert to a religion." In fact, "convert to a religion" is such a common collocation that if a random native English speaker were prompted to complete the phrase "convert to ________", he/she would likely intuitively fill in the blank with the word "religion" or a specific choice- e.g. "Christianity," "Islam," etc. If you don't think so, I wonder which word you would personally use to describe, for example, someone who switches from Hinduism to Islam or from Buddhism to Christianity... Would you not use the word "convert" in that situation?? And as for "converting to Jesus"...well, I personally have never used that phrase before (nor heard anyone else express it). I suppose it could be used to describe someone who becomes a Christian (since Jesus is Christ), but it does sound a bit funny, to me at least, when I hear the phrase "convert to Jesus"...
As for "converting to a denomination," I guess I partially agree with you (only partially though)- in this case, it simply depends on whether we wish to restrict the usage of the verb "convert" within a religious context to describe only a change from one distinct religion to another distinct religion (and not to apply it to a change from one branch of a religion to another branch within that same religion)- but I still feel that to impose that limitation of usage would be unnecessarily pedantic.
@@verdecillo9940
Your comment is very good, then what God would expect from someone is, to give his or her life to Jesus Christ.
Rock on! Amazing explanation. Thank you!
First of all, you should get yourself a Catholic Bible and get it blessed by a Priest! You will experience a big difference. When I first picked up a Protestant Bible afterwards it felt so empty! Because it is NOT the whole Bible! Also, once I started having visions in Mass on the Eucharist, I knew it was real presence of Jesus!
This was great.
Father Mike's exuberance is positively infectious :)
Thanks again Fr. Mike! Always a joy to hear you. God bless!
This is the first time I have seen a Catholic Priest preach like a Protestant.
There are several that do! There are some very good Priests!
I'm 52 year old cradle catholic, and only in the past 2-3 years have I finally been able to grasp, accept, and believe that the eucharist IS Jesus. It wasn't until I was around 40 did I learn that our priests were speaking literally when they said the eucharist is Jesus and not meant just as a symbol! It's funny because it's easy to believe that Jesus rose from the dead, performed miracles, and multiplied bread and fish, etc...but it took me so long to believe that the eucharist is Jesus' body! To be fair, I always wanted to believe, but my brain could not wrap itself around the idea as fact. I thank God that the scales have fallen from my eyes and I now believe the truth.
My uncle is a wealthy protestant preacher in Tennessee. I knew right away that my Catholic faith was the one true religion when he said he was thinking about moving to Dallas because it was a “better market”. 😅 Praying for all our protestant brothers and sisters always 🫶
Hope you know even Protestants are against things like that. Using the church for your own gain
"Well, if it's a symbol, to hell with it." -Flannery O'Connor
Taking John 6:53-58 literally is certainly something. I'm at a loss for words that people believe what this guy is saying.
Amen 🌹 ❤️ 🕊
Hey FR. Mike I liked this talk, I just wish you wouldn’t have skipped verses 63-65, as those are the verses that Indicate to me that Jesus was speaking in metaphor not literal.
Pray That I Will Conquer My Sinful Tendencies Flee Evildoers Pray The Rosary The Divine Mercy Prayer To St Michael Stations Of The Cross Memorare To St Joseph Poor Souls In Purgatory All My Priest Friends For The Pope
"The bread I give..." I don't think he was referring to eucharyst in that particular passage. I think he was referring to himself and the salvation he offers.
Similarly to how he referred to being "born again" and Nicodemus was wondering about literal birth.
Amen.
TAKE JESUS AT HIS WORD:
WHEN JESUS SAID, “THE FATHER IS THE ONE TRUE GOD,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 17:3). WHEN JESUS SAID “HE CAME TO DO THE WILL OF HIS FATHER AND TO FINISH HIS WORK,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 4:34). WHEN JESUS SAID THAT “GOD GAVE HIM LIFE,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 5:26). WHEN HE SAYS, “HE CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 5:30). WHEN JESUS SAYS “HE HAS NOT SPOKEN OF HIMSELF BUT OF THE FATHER WHO SENT HIM,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 12:49-50). WHEN HE SAYS, “HE WILL SHOW US PLAINLY OF THE FATHER,” BELIEVE HIM (JOHN 16:25). WE MUST BELIEVE JESUS BECAUSE HE IS THE ONLY WAY TO BE WITH THE FATHER (JOHN 14:6).
How long does bread stay Jesus, until it goes into the stomach? I wish he could last longer.
Jesus was sitting when He said “this is my body.”.
You can’t have 2 Jesus’.
Love the insight on where the there is proof the eucharist is in the bible. I'm assuming Jesus give this ability to his apostles and in doing so, they passed onto other disciples/apostles. Where I struggle is where in the Bible does it say only priests can convert bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. If we are all disciples of Christ, why can't we bless bread and wine ourselves?
I have been a Catholic for 70. Yes, and when I was young and went to mass, the priest never said body blood soul and vinity. He said body and blood. When was the word soul and divinity added to the consecration of the host? Could somebody please tell me the answer to this question? Thank you
Transubstantiation is opposed to one of the most basic teachings of the Bible, the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ, as noted at Matthew 20:28 and 1 Timothy 2:5,6. As the apostle Paul shows at Hebrews 9:22, “Unless blood is shed, there can be no remission of sins.” Transubstantiation involves an admittedly “bloodless sacrifice” (or “unbloody” as one commentator here wrote) and therefore cannot wipe out sins as claimed.
Then too, Paul, at Hebrews ch. 9 and 10, repeatedly insists that Jesus Christ died only once, that only one sacrifice is needed. It is therefore a denying of Paul’s words to hold that other sacrifices are needed, and it is not biblical to hold that imperfect men can create the divine Christ afresh daily and sacrifice him.
Paul distinctly shows that just as the high priest in Israel entered into the holy of holies with the blood of sacrificed animals to make atonement, so Jesus Christ entered heaven itself with the value or merit of his sacrifice to make atonement for his followers. No human priest could enter heaven to appear on behalf of others to obtain forgiveness for them, since “flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God.” 1 Corinthians 15:50.
And if Jesus, by saying, ‘this is my body, my blood,’ miraculously changed the bread and wine into his very flesh and blood, performing the most noteworthy miracle of his ministry, surely this would not only have been explicitly stated but made paramount throughout the Christian Greek Scriptures. But transubstantiation is not even mentioned, let alone discussed, because it is not a fact but only fiction. It is not taught in the Bible.
The belief in transubstantiation has done much harm. It fosters idolatry in that both priests and people adore the “host” as the body of Christ upon the priests’ saying, “Hoc est autem corpus meum,” and then ringing a bell. In holding that only an ordained priest can perform the sacrifice of the mass and pronounce the words of consecration the people are made wholly dependent upon their priests for forgiveness of sins.
Truly reason, the facts and the Scriptures unite to prove that the Bible does not teach transubstantiation. It’s pure fiction IMHO.
Read John 6 to V 63. His words are spirit n only the Spirit gives life. V63 is the explanation of ch6.
Who turns the bread n wine to physical body n blood? Some special guy they call father in spite of the Lord saying clearly to call no man father, as we have one father who is in heaven
The pride of man is His downfall. In n out the church.
Is the book of Hebrews in the Catholic Bible? I ask because Catholics teach the exact opposite of what Hebrews teaches. Chapter 7:26-28, and10:11-18 for examples.
Father Mike. As always-- Thanks for your efforts to explain the faith. It is good that people are at least making the effort-- but please stop calling things true that can be interpreted many ways. You and I can believe what we want but the Catholic interpretation of scripture is not the only one- and Jesus did speak symbolically much of the time. Some one can easily point out where the hosts and wine are made and say you are not being honest. Don't interpret the bible for everyone else. Just live it to the best of your ability.
At most, this proves that when JESUS turns bread into his flesh, it's his flesh. This says nothing about sinful humans attempting the same.
Communion is a remembrance. Please stop changing what Christ said.
It's a symbol of the most amazing thing ever. I don't know why we need to make it literal.
Father Mike,
The following comment is in reference to the video you put up One year ago in which you showed off your tattoo on the inside of your right wrist. My phone shut down while I was commenting, it was lost , so I searched for a more recent video.
You very well know , Fr. Mike, Jesus , by His own words, came to fulfill the law , not change the law. So, your blatant misunderstanding of the teachings , from the old testament, on marking or cutting or tattooing your body , is not so. Particularly as a Catholic. Your understanding of the old testament is a Protestant stance.
You are leading your flock astray. Jesus also proclaimed , to who much is given much will be expected.
Why are you looking for validation from your youtube
followers? YOU are the leader. You are not unhappy with the tattoo or you would have kept the fact to yourself. You have been tricked, by your own explanation. The fact you're asking for validation or comments proves you know it is NOT acceptable.
Tattoos are very much a symbol of This WORLD,more so now then ever. Please don't tell me you are unaware of this.
Why do Catholic Priest wear all black? As a visible sign to Christians and NON Christians , that by the vows you took at your Ordination, you are dead to the things of THIS WORLD. You are Jesus in the FLESH while presiding at His Alter. If you need to think of Jesus or be reminded of you love for Him, all that you need to do is look at your reflection in the mirror.
Also your body , all our bodies ,are Temples of God.
They are only on loan.
I will pray for your soul , Fr. Mike.
My older sister suggested I follow your Bible in a year study. The moment I opened the link and first saw you, I knew you were not fulfilled in your vocation nor at peace in proclaiming the Good News of Jesus. You were, and still appear to be in the the above video, one where you show off your tattoo, and several others I have attempted to watch in the past, talking much to much. Explaining every little thing you said. Fidgeting nervously.
You need to go back to the Seminary, Fr. Mike. Doing what you did to God's Temple, as a 50 year old Priest, proves to me you clearly , you haven't worked out within yourself , what needed to be while you were in your formation. You were either not honest with your Superiors in Seminary or you were allowed to be Ordained before you should have been.
Peace in Christ Jesus.
May we all celebrate the birth of OUR LORD,
Merry Christmas.❤
Mat 23:9 And don't call anyone on earth 'Father,' because you have only one Father, the one in heaven.
Mat 23:10 Nor are you to be called 'Teachers,' because you have only one teacher, the Messiah!
Mat 23:11 The person who is greatest among you must be your servant.
Mat 23:12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
Now read john v63. It explains the body n blood.
Don't be a catholic. Be a Christian, read n study your Bible n pray much. THATS COMMUNION WITH GOD. Not all the gobbledygook n fancy clothing etc in RC church.
We have to remember that what Jesus said in John 6 happened a year BEFORE the Lord’s Evening Meal was instituted! Jesus’ fleshly body was still intact when he offered this bread. If the bread and wine were changed into his flesh and blood during the Lord’s Evening Meal, then those partaking would be repeating that sacrifice. His sacrifice took place “ONCE for all time.” (Hebrews 9:25,26) If the apostles were really eating and drinking his literal flesh and blood, that would have been cannibalism and a violation of God’s law! (Genesis 9:3,4; Leviticus 17:10) And if they had been literally drinking Jesus’ blood, he wouldn’t have said that his blood “IS TO BE poured out,” indicating that his sacrifice was yet to occur. (Matthew 26:28)
When Jesus said, “I AM the door” and “I AM the true vine,” no one thought that he was a literal door or a literal vine. (John 10:7; 15:1) Likewise, when The New Jerusalem Bible quotes Jesus as saying: “This cup IS the new covenant,” we don’t conclude that the cup itself was literally the new covenant. There can be no question that the bread meant, or symbolizes his body. Thus, the Charles B. Williams translation says: “This represents my body.” (Luke 22:19,20)
why Paul exhorted Corinthians to "discern the body and blood", as people eat and drank as if they were with hunger? why to call atention to forbbid public sinners to eat during this time in specific? beware of late translations, be more attached to the earliest ones from the firsts centuries.
Also, His sacrifice took place “ONCE for all time.” (Hebrews 9:25,26), like you said, but people still sin to this day, so how is it posible that the world itself didnt changed but the grace of Jesus in the cross?
The thing is, Jesus cannot fogive a sin that doesnt exist in current time, but every sin that existed. He justified every honest and just people before Him, including the "good thief", as everyone were bid to the old convenant. Jesuss new covenant will only work as the writter dies (Jesus himself), thats why we dont do circunsition, it was refined with the batism with water.
Still, every time this memory of Him in the cross is done in paralelism of his last banquet with the 11 apostles, we are updating the effect of his grace, for our salvation, as humanity continues to sin... We cannot participate in something 2000 years ago, but Jesus give this opportunity by this update of His Grace.
You dont clean your room because of the future dirts, but a true cleaning can put a old house into a new shape. You dont use antibiotics to treat a symtom that doesnt exist, but it will cleanse your body from a disease that is happening from days or even year latent into your body.
Unless we think the salvation, seeing in his Body and Blood, as a vaccine, i would agree with your view from Hebrews 9, that its effect is current posterior to his Death. But, still, why do we still sin then? by lack of knowlegde? actually, one can know the bible, but to follow the ultimate commandment of "loving God with all force and all spirit, also loving the next one as loving self" its really hard. Once you lack patience with someone, even by a little bit, you sinned. But after the sin, what we do (or we should do)? ask forgivness.
Whats the image that came into mind? His Death in the cross, the motive He did it, totally selfless, it makes we to repent sincerely. Then we ask forgivness. His grace with His merits in the Cross will work everytime we do this, if we dont, it wont happen. Its an active act, not pasive. We need to repent every day, we need to update His grace, if we dont, there is no salvation (lack of repetence doesnt lead to heaven, in other words). But it depends in our action, to repent and ask forgivness, it doenst need to be a physical act, even a thought is sufficient, as someone can do external acts without humilty and repetence from the heart.
"Once for all time" refer from all time in past and present / current time, as future doesnt exist, thats the problem from this interpretation, also induces to accept the sin as a "fate", which is wrong, as we have a choice in the present. That's fundament of God's grace, as being saved by Him, while we ask for it. That's why men can stop sinning same sins as before (to stop gambling, to stop sodomy, to stop having sexual intercourse before and outside the matrimony, to stop doing false testmony, to stop stealing, etc).
But if this could help you, the correlation done with the slain animals from old covenant laws are intrisicaly related to the figuration of the imolated lamb as Jesus Christ. As no animal was pleasant to God anymore (as the sins were reaching the heavens in number and the sacricifes were low or done without heart), His Son will suffice with infinite price and efficiency that no imolated animal could do, since any patriach that existed. And what God ordered tho those patriachs to do with the sacrifices? eat.
This sounds terrific if applied to Jesus, but remember when 70+ discipules and man were with Him, and He said about eating him Flesh and Blood, they said "its too much" and disbanded until resting 12 apostles alone. Paul wasnt within those 12, but he believed until the point of exhorting the corithians, as i said before, with extreme respect to the elements of bread and wine. Thats a thing to reflect on, as many christians, from Iberic penisule to India, christian communities released rites to do this memory Jesus ordered to the 11 apostles in the first century, and historical documents and emphasises it, like from "Justin, the martyr" when asked by romans what christians in those reunions, at second century... The Malabar (siriac-malabar) rite in india, since 2000 years, to celebrate this memory of real Body and Blood of Jesus, despise not being the roman rite of Roman church, in other words, the "eucharisty is a invention of IV century theory" falls apart. And for us, christians, God and coincidences/casuality/accidents cannot coexist.
To receive better grace than Jesus himself, there is no greater honor, even lacking of merit to receive it (but Jesus wants, and that suffices) as it confirms once again, every sin done so far will be cleansed from God's Justice, as the salary of the sin is the death. Jesus is Life himself. But, once again, no public sinners/ promoters of scandals, CANNOT enter the row of communion to receive Jesus himself, or they will receive their DAMNATION, instead of Life. This is also from Paul's exhortation for Corinthians and says much. Like, someone wanting the grace, but doesnt change the heart. Their praise to Lord is external, so He will puke those.
Its historical belief and practice, those outside from the community also public sinners were fobbiden to receive Eucharisty, as it would be rather offense to Lord himself. Didnt you asked yourself why not all catholics receive communion, if its a common sense for them? Also why some catholic did trend topics at internet about the "scandal" of some import catholic politician receiving communion, while being a notorious pro-choice (favorable to abortion)?
Again, the warning from Paul isnt being respected... Even worse if some stranger from the community to receive and "safe it" for whatever reasons. No one should do that, even less to touch it with barehands. But since the modernization from CVII, this value is being lost. If you compare any old rite with the Novus Ordus Mass, you see clearyly the lack of respect in many points... if God is present in the enviroment, shouldnt be the men more respectfull, without noisy instrument? The memory Jesus ordered wasnt supposed to be a contemplation, instead of a party?
You’ll be so much accountable for your false teachings.
This is idolatry now
No it's not look into eucharistic miracles. Have faith and believe. Many people left when he said est my flesh drink my blood. Many Christians love Jesus but yet don't have faith in John 6! I recommend looking into the eucharistic miracles. Godbless
@@empackmanmueller1725 it’s a demon not god doing those miracles n it’s symbolic not actual, Christ said to pluck your eye out to get to heaven are u gonna do that,he said he was a door does he have hinges he said he was a vine does he have branches n leaves, he said his body was a temple etc etc,Same thing his body and blood are bread and wine not literal
No proof at all
Eucharist not true
Bread is coming down from heaven
Not that wafer from bakery
the mass/eucharist is a wicked ceremony, which re-sacrifices Christ millions of times, denying that Christ's death on the cross was enough for salvation. it supposedly empowers the roman catholic priesthood (only fully established in the 12th century) to actually make the wine and bread to be the actual blood and body of Christ. read john 6, the whole chapter. Jesus was speaking rhetorically. He was saying accept Him spiritually. it has NOTHING to do with the actual physical eating of His flesh and blood. where in the n.t. do His disciples actually eat His flesh or drink His blood? they don't. they follow Him! the roman catholic church is a false church based only partly on the bible, but more on man-made doctrines and practices.
Where is the proof? You just read the passage and put into it your own belief and what it means to you! 😂 This thing what the Roman Catholics call the doctrine of transubstantiation came out of the 3rd phase of the Tridentine or 1500+ years after Jesus gave the Apostles the instructions, if you will, about the Lord's supper. What you failed to consider is what did it mean to the first century Jew and not what the Roman Catholics interpret 1500+ years later.
All the ancient churches believe it is the body and blood of Christ, and there is no record of disagreement about it going all the way back, the difference is Orthodox say how it happens is a mystery. so you are completely wrong about your history
the proof is its been done for thousands of years.
Look into eucharistic miracles. You have to believe and have faith. The miracles have happened where the eucharist turned into flesh from the left heart ventricle and is AB+ blood. Blessed carlos acutis created data base for people to see the miracles and learn more about them. Godbless
Why do people think Jesus is God? Because Jesus is God's interpreter.
True believers must work together to correct the wrong that has been done. It is impossible for Jesus to be God when Jesus himself prayed to the Father saying, “and this is life eternal, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” (John 17:3). Jesus never bears witness of himself unless the Father commands him (John 5:31). God bears witness of Jesus through Jesus (John 12:49-50). God gave Jesus life; Jesus said “for as the Father has life in him, so has he given to the Son to have life in himself” (John 5:26). We must know them both in order to have eternal life.
Why do people think Jesus is God? Because Jesus is God's interpreter.
True believers must work together to correct the wrong that has been done. It is impossible for Jesus to be God when Jesus himself prayed to the Father saying, “and this is life eternal, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” (John 17:3). Jesus never bears witness of himself unless the Father commands him (John 5:31). God bears witness of Jesus through Jesus (John 12:49-50). God gave Jesus life; Jesus said “for as the Father has life in him, so has he given to the Son to have life in himself” (John 5:26). We must know them both in order to have eternal life.
U don’t know what the Trinity is do you?
do you have the power to spread that belief? goodluck
@@healhands5760 Power? I have no power whatsoever. We plant, God gives the increase (1 Corinthians 3:6-8).
@@user-rj8py9ld3j [John 6:22] onwards will answer all your questions my brother. and why lots of christians hate Catholics regarding the bread and wine. it is all in that chapter.
@@healhands5760 Right…who gave them the bread?
"Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath *God the Father sealed."* (John 6:27)
"Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but *my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven."* (John 6:32)
So even in this context, Jesus still speaks of the Father and how it was GOD the Father who gives us the bread of life. Don’t take scripture out of context.