You all need Jesus! 😂 This man is bringing masses (including my own family) through the Chosen. It may not be your cup of tea, but God works in His own ways. Stop judging. And He takes care of his people. Hence, Jonathan's idea to start the shirt. Tell me none of you have jobs??? The Chosen is done on donation. Glass houses, all. Let Jesus use this man as HE sees fit. From a cradle Catholic that was brought back to the Church bc of The Chosen! 🙏🙌 May God Bless you all.
Precisely. People who seek for perfection in evangelisation are being ridiculous. There isn't anything we can do here on earth with divine perfection that God would approve of fully and exactly. So why would people have this expectation in evangelisation?
@alisterrebelo9013 absolutely! And one of the things I PRAYED over on coming back to the RC Church was if it was the true church, what God wanted, etc. And over and over again, I had in my head that God uses people in different ways because PEOPLE have different needs. We don't fit in a bucket. Only Divine guidance knows exactly what our souls and hearts need. The theology behind the series is awesome. They went to great lengths to preserve Christianity and Judiasm AND draw people in. Much love to you! 💜
My one claim to fame now is that Jonathan Roumie borrowed my garment bag for the Eucharistic Congress. May God bless him for all that he does and for his willingness to speak the truth.
Glad I got to see this and hear the backstory of the tshirt! I hadn't understood it and was perplexed about it and even a little offended by it. And that didn't jive with my previous impression of Jonathan Roumie. So I really appreciate the clarification!
Shirts as conversation starters can be great. I remember wearing the original 40 Days for Life t-shirts, which only said "40 Days for Life". People I knew would stare, trying to figure out what it meant or what it was, since it didn't give away enough to answer that. It built curiosity. Eventually, they would ask what 40 Days for Life is. At that point, I can talk much more about it, because I'm answering their question, and I can frame how to introduce abortion into the conversation. After a few years, a different design said, "40 Days for Life - Pray to End Abortion". Not only did that make it less welcome in many places, but it gave away too much, so people didn't approach with curiosity. I was happy that the shirts eventually went back to the other design.
There's nothing wrong in defending the Truth. Our personal beliefs don't matter. It's the Truth that counts. If it's provocative, good! Still, the Congress seemingly didn't address the elephant in the room, which is that the modern Church avoids radicalism, sacredness, silence, suffering, repentance, hell, etc. That so many bishops want the Tradition to be forgotten, the Church replaced with something new and fun... But the return to Tradition is essential to a successful Eucharistic revival. Because there's no Eucharist without Tradition, and no Tradition without the Eucharist.
And what if the truth happens to be that the Lord's Supper is a symbolic, spiritual gesture? Have you considered Mark 14: 24-25? 24 And He said to them, “This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. 25 Truly I say to you, I will never again drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” Jesus goes from figurative language to then going back to saying what is in the cup is wine.
@@ToeTag1968 Because in some sense it is both. The Church teaches that it's the substance (the being) that changes, but accidents (appearances) remain that of bread and "of the fruit of the vine". The ancient Jewish Passover celebration didn't use a symbol or metaphor of a lamb, but flesh of an actual living lamb selected and sacrificed for that very purpose. It was both a memorial and a thanksgiving sacrifice representing the original sacrifice made in Egypt. And that's why Jesus instituted a new Passover celebration, with Him as the Lamb, sacrificed every time we celebrate it, as a memorial and thanksgiving sacrifice of Jesus, by Jesus, for us, to the Father.
@@damnedmadman Interesting point to ponder. Also consider that the lamb was slaughtered (dead) and then cooked and eaten. It was a temporary stop-gap until our perfect Lord offered himself up. The eating of the lamb didn't forgive sins. It was the sacrifice to God that wiped the slate clean. Jesus is a living sacrifice. Once dead, buried, resurrected. In a sense, we can consider the spiritual/symbolic act of "digesting" or internalizing the knowledge of what He did on the cross. Eating human flesh and drinking blood was well outside the bounds of the Levitical laws. The people of the time would have better understood. And, Jesus confirms in John 6:63. It's not the flesh, it's a spiritual thing. God bless and thanks for the dialogue!
@@ToeTag1968 But it's not human flesh and blood. And if His flesh profited nothing, Jesus wouldn't spend so much time (and lose disciples) speaking about how essential it is to eat His flesh... The word flesh has several meanings. I really recommend you check out some latest videos from the "Shameless Popery Podcast" that analyze John 6 specifically. Very interesting and fun to watch.
I don't think I've ever been shocked at something Catholic to the point of saying "that's blasphemy". You know... why this war? Protestants believe it's a symbol. That's their understanding of scripture. Not because they are negligent or heretical. When I read the scripture, I don't see transubstantiation. Only a possibility of it. It's a maybe. You have to take something figurative as literal to come up with that belief. Transubstantiation cannot be proved from scripture. It's a church belief that was handed down. Protestants only accept the scriptures. They take the Lord's supper very seriously, though. They examine themselves, it is a solemn moment to renew repentance. That's really important. it's critical. It's not to be mocked! This is like me mocking Mary in some way. I would not do that! Even if I don't believe Mary is divine. I would not spit on another's sacred belief. It's disgusting to do that. No, this shirt is not cool at all. I do not think God is happy with it. It's mocking one of his Sacraments. Even if you do not see it as a sacrament. It is. I think this is actually very serious. Telling God to shove his Sacrament to hell ??! You need to fear God
For the nth time, that's a misconception that Catholics believe that Mary is divine. Although we ask for her intercession, we only venerate her. We might look like we praise her, but truly in our hearts we treat her as our mother, not a God. Also, the belief of the transubstantiation is in the bible (John 6: 53-57) Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. 54 Whoever eats* my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
Thank you for so eloquently speaking for us Back slidden Protestants.😂 j/k In all seriousness the Lords Super,Holy Communion or The Eucharist is not taken lightly in the Protestant faith. Raised as a Southern Baptist if you were not Baptized you should not partake in the Lords Super. I think that should speak volumes to our Catholic or Non Protestant Brothers and Sisters. 🙏
And Jesus said to them, “I assure you and most solemnly say to you, unless you eat the flesh ( which is the Word or the Bible )of the Son of Man and drink His blood [unless you believe in Me as Savior and believe in the saving power of My blood which will be shed for you], you do not have life in yourselves. After reading the comments and doing some research it seems to take on a very different perspective in the Catholic Faith almost Dark and Metaphysical. This is a very divisive issue. Nothing Divisive comes from the Father nor does Confusion come from the Father. I am grateful for this opportunity to become more enlightened regarding this topic. May God continually Bless you and Keep You
@@MIMI-D If your interpretation is the true one, why would His followers murmur and say "This saying is hard"? It's because they knew exactly what He meant...literally eating His Flesh and Blood. Please re-read the Bread of Life discourse. Peace.
@@diamondlou1 no wonder Jesus got so frustrated with them. You actually believe he was telling them to eat him and drink his blood. You can’t possibly believe that. This whole divisive Catholic Protestant thing was started by one Group. We both know who that was. This bickering sounds like the Pharisees and their legalistic ways. C u N Heaven
Please fix the quote on the shirt to her actual quote. "If it's "just" a symbol". It is an important distinction and could help the understanding between Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants. I was going to order the shirt to wear in my theology classes but the missing word sort of defeats the point I am trying to make with my students about the authentic meaning of symbolism. The Eucharist is a symbol but it is more than a mere arbitrary symbol. It is a true symbol in that it is a visible manifestation of an invisible reality. It is a real participation in the body and blood of Christ. The substance is Christ and is truly present but that does not mean it is not a symbol.
I really wish the shirt said JUST a symbol. The Eucharist is both a symbol and a reality. The logic of the shirt doesn’t reflect the Catholic Church teaching.
And the USCCB states that “ The transformed bread and wine are truly the Body and Blood of Christ and are not merely symbols. When Christ said “This is my body” and “This is my blood,” the bread and wine are transubstantiated.” The implication when they say it’s not merely a sign is that it is both a sign and a reality.
I was disappointed they didnt do the Transfiguration scene. Missed opportunity imo. I havent finished the most recent season, but plan on it. The scene where Jesus anounces His church passing authority to Peter was less than ideal, left room for "interpretation". They take a lot of "artistic" liberties, BUT Jesus comes off like the one I've always imagined in my mind. Great depiction of Jesus.
@matthew7491 oh I get that, I feel many interpretations can only exist through the more modern view absent of Jewish beliefs of the time of Jesus and the translation not fully capturing the Greek. I know people that think Peter is just a nickname for Simon. They actually call Simon the Zealot as Simon Peter the Zealot.
@@Yeoman530 it’s ironic too. The Rock part of what Jesus said isn’t even the clincher. It’s the keys. He gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom. That has a very specific meaning referring to a very specific official position in the kingdom of the son of David (and other ancient kingdoms, eg Joseph in Pharoah’s Egypt). It’s basically the prime minister on steroids. What the key holder says is taken to be the same as the king saying it.
what you see as a good thing i see as a very bad thing. if a depiction makes you feel good about *your* mental image of god, then it is like you are just talking to yourself. god has no time for your preconcieved notions.
@Gwyll_Arboghast I said nothing of my feelings besides disappointment. The depiction of Jesus is objectively one of the best ever, and it resonates with everyone probably because they did an objectively great job. I don't speak to voices in my head. I have no idea where you got that from. Finally, God is eternal, which means He has all the time in the world. He rewards me for following His Will, the Holy Spirit is with me, Jesus loves me, and I share that love with everyone that lets me. In honor of St. Michael's Lent, let us 🙏 pray: St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him we humbly pray; and do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, thrust into hell satan, and all evil spirits, who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen. GBY 🇻🇦 ✝️
I'm taking a leap here...but I'm guessing JR got the quote from Bishop Barron. I'm reading the bishop's book "This is My Body" and on p.69 also uses the quote without the "just".
I was hoping for an explanation, perhaps a reference to something that O'Connor wrote about this quote. The best that I could find was that she stood up and said it at some literary conference.
She apparently was at a dinner party and the only Catholic. The hostess remarked that the Eucharist "...is a symbol but a pretty good one." That's when O'Connor commented "If it's [just] a symbol..."
@@diamondlou1 I think for a 1st century Jew to engage in cannibalism and the drinking of blood would be virtually impossible. The of course there is the abstaining from blood in ACTS...
I get the sentiment, but the quote is actually mistaken from any traditional Catholic perspective. The Eucharist is a symbol, but not only a symbol, for it makes present what it represents. The quote describes the Sacrament purely in opposition to the reformed view, rather than expressing the fullness of our faith.
you're on the right track, but a symbol is not a representation. that would be just a sign. a symbol is precisely what you are describing: not a representation but an actual presentation. the quote loses us the battle by admitting materialist premises.
IT IS 1000% NOT A SYMBOL IN ANY WAY. NOT A SYMBOL. IT IS THE BODY, BLOOD, SOUL & DIVINITY OF THE SECOND PERSON OF THE BLESSED TRINITY. IT IS NOT SYMBOLIC IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. THIS IS HERESY.
You have to now how to worship correctly to even know what is worship and what is not. If the person isn’t worshipping something no one can say they are.
As a Catholic, I have taken great issue with the language used on the T-Shirt. Catechism 1131: "The sacraments are efficacious SIGNS of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us. The visible rites by which the sacraments are celebrated SIGNIFY and make present the graces proper to each sacrament. They bear fruit in those who receive them with the required dispositions." The Eucharist is both the Real Presence and is a SIGN! I have seen various quotes from O'Connor some inserting the word "just a Symbol" in which case that would be a correct representation of our Faith. The Eucharist is BOTH the Real BODY BLOOD SOUL and DIVINITY of CHRIST ANNNNND it is a SYMBOL!!!! To say the Eucharsit is not a symbol is against our Catholic teaching. Words are very important, and without the word "just" we are no longer adequetly representing the true teachings of the Catholic Church. I would reccomend Catholics to not wear or purchase the shirt or advocate for it. The Sacraments are perfect/effacacious symbols in which they actually do what they signify CCC 1127. I would hope you would respond to this in a follow up video. I love you both Matt and Jonathan and know that you are not promoting this with any sort of intention for misinterpriting Catholic Teaching. I feel as this is something most Catholics miss in the "technicalities" but these small Truths do still matter.
@@soldierofmary984 I sited two sources in the catechism of the Catholic Church. It is both the real presence and a symbol. It is an efficacious symbol in which it is what it signifies.
It's a very irreverent quote. The problem with this quote, among other things, is that it doesn't even make sense. Even if it were just a symbol, it wouldn't be proper to say "to hell with it." Let's take a painting of Jesus -the qualities it may have symbolize something about Jesus. Could we really say that because the painting is only a symbol to hell with it?
All churches founded by the Apostles from time of Christ on up to now believe the Eucharist to be the actual presence of Christ. After the Protestant Reformation, Protestants (especially Evangelicals) did away with the Eucharist saying it’s just a “symbol”.
it comes from a failure to clarify a misunderstanding. liberal christians say 'it is a symbol, therefore it isnt really christ's flesh', and this abysmal misunderstanding of symbol infected the conservatives who said 'well then it's not a symbol'.
@@Gwyll_Arboghast ohhh ok I get it now. Well Jesus spoke in analogy all the time. Most of the time actually. So why would you think the bread was actually his flesh?
@@jbm0745I was raised Southern Baptist and we always had communion or your Eucharist. Now I am a non denominational Christian and we take it every service. So I’m not understanding the “Protestant” reference . Are you saying they don’t take the blood and body seriously or just don’t have it at all. Isn’t that kind of a broad categorization. I am of 2 denominations and it was or never will be some flippant act of Symbolism. We take this very seriously . The only difference is we don’t use Wine and we don’t all drink from the same cup . I have had communion many times at a morning mass I used to attend. Please help me understand what I am missing. Ty
"if its not a symbol to hell with it" is the most idiotic thing you could say. Why is some actor even being interviewed? who cares? If it *isnt* a symbol, to hell with it.
If it’s merely a symbol, it’s just bread. That’s nothing and kind of pointless. But since it isn’t a symbol, it’s Jesus’ flesh. Your rewording says if it’s Jesus’ flesh then to hell with it. I surely hope that isn’t your intended meaning.
@@tylerdean3489 'merely' is not a word that i used. it is bread, that is a fact. the question is what else is it. is it 'merely' bread? no. but you and this fellow have the whole thing backward. your reaction to my way of putting it is the same as my reaction to F OConnor's way of putting it. if it is jesus' flesh, it is a symbol. no matter what you consider the boundaries of the term 'symbol', denying symbol is to castrate the sacrament. simply bread and no other meaning is nothing and pointless. but likewise literal flesh is not in itself meaningful. merely flesh gets you no further than merely bread.
@@Gwyll_Arboghast "Merely" was in reference to it being a symbol, not bread. It's not "merely" a symbol. It's a reality. It both is the flesh of Jesus Christ and a symbol of the new Covenant. Jesus's flesh is a big deal. Since it's Jesus's flesh, it is literally Jesus. God is altogether simple (not composite) and so to have Jesus's flesh is to have the totality of Jesus. Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. We partake and eat Jesus's flesh since he said if we do, He has life because of the Father and we will have life because of Him. It's pivotal and incredible important that we have the Eucharist!!! How on earth can you say that Jesus's flesh is not meaningful. It is the very same flesh that suffered, died and rose again that we eat. We eat Jesus. That is meaningful. If you don't think it's meaningful to have Jesus physically present, why even be Christian at all?
@@tylerdean3489 you have failed to explain how it is meaningful, you only repeated several times that it is. if you were to explain *why* it is meaningful, you would be invoking symbolism. when you eat 'mere flesh', as you do with a chicken, it is a *part* of the animal. that the eucharist is the totality of jesus is a statement that it is not mere flesh. that is a symbolic claim. when you eat a chicken, you consume it and it is gone. that we eat the same flesh that suffered and rose puts it beyond mere flesh. another symbolic claim. all this is why invoking the term "mere" is to suffer a misunderstanding from the beginning. symbolism is precisely what makes something not merely its substance. to be clear, i am not saying it is less than what you are saying it is; what i'm saying is that the essence of your description is right, but when you say something like "it isnt a symbol", you throw the whole thing out.
@@Gwyll_Arboghast So I think we may have a mutual understanding then, the Eucharist has meaning because of whose flesh it is. It's Jesus's flesh which has intrinsic meaning. It's also a symbol for that which it is, so it's a symbol and the thing signified. It's a symbol of His flesh, and it is His flesh. It's a symbol of His sacrifice, and His sacrifice re-presented to the Father. Maybe I'm still misunderstanding your position but yes I agree, it's not merely flesh. It's Jesus's flesh, both as a symbol and a reality.
@helenemakuch8366 one member of the filming crew had a pride flag on his camera. We could see it in one video that showed the back stage filming of season 4. And the director made clear that he is not profiling the crew to be Christans to work on the Chosen. It's ridiculous to assume that people that work in the show is free of sin and they might even be in a process of conversion by working on it. The flag was not in the show. So woe to silly people and their stones
@@ForgeMondes A lot obfuscation and straw men in that response. How is pointing out that these flags were on the show's set throwing stones or silly? How am I assuming people on the show are free of sin?
@charlessteadman2518 forgive me if it sounded unnecessarily accusatory. You are right and I might have vented frustration à little too much over there. Throwing stones was more intended as a metaphor for Hyper focusing in a little detail on the set (not even the show itself) when is so unnecessary compared to good the show can and is bringing. (Despite the many artistic choices that can diminish the message of Scriptures). But again I offer an apology for my tone. Is not as if ranting on a comment section is going to bring change in the world 😮💨 Blessings from this side of the globe 🙏
IT IS 1000% NOT A SYMBOL IN ANY WAY. NOT A SYMBOL. IT IS THE BODY, BLOOD, SOUL & DIVINITY OF THE SECOND PERSON OF THE BLESSED TRINITY. IT IS NOT SYMBOLIC IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. THIS IS HERESY.
I am glad it is edgy...I hope he wears it on the set...Protestants (which I was one) need to see and hear the truth. The Chosen doesn't push the TRUE Jesus enough.
If “it” is something Jesus commanded, I would be very wary of saying ‘to hell with it”, regardless of what “it” is. This really smacks of a truly arrogant attitude … disappointing.
WRONG. The Sacraments are "outward signs instituted by Christ to give grace". IT IS 1000% NOT A SYMBOL IN ANY WAY. NOT A SYMBOL. IT IS THE BODY, BLOOD, SOUL & DIVINITY OF THE SECOND PERSON OF THE BLESSED TRINITY. IT IS NOT SYMBOLIC IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. THIS IS HERESY.
@@jenns6063 I'm sorry friend, but you just don't understand what the word symbol means. Greek word "mysterion" was usually translated with "symbollum" by the lain fathers to talk about the sacraments. Read Tertulian, Augustine and others.
Again the catholic are missing the point! As if taking in your wine and bread saves you! It is living like JESUS, it is loving God and loving your Neighbor. It is a symbol but also a call to do as Jesus did. Tell me what is easier? Drinking wine and eating bread or loving your neighbor(who can be anyone). Please don't be so legalistic like the pharisees! God is after your HEART! Though I am not catholic you are still my brothers and I pray for you and love you!
Dear Catholics: You’re not the only Christians who believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist. You’re just the only ones required to believe in a medieval scholastic explanation of it.
The Greeks & Syriacs also have an identical description of the metaphysics as described in the doctrine of Transubstantiation, & from what I understand their articulations are older than that of St. Thomas Aquinas’. The polemics against the Catholic doctrine seem only to be reactionary from Protestants, & some Orthodox who do not even understand their own doctrinal history.
@@DarthVeers2 Lutherans, Anglicans, and Eastern Orthodox all hold to robust doctrines of the Real Presence without binding themselves to Scholastic definitions, rooted in Aristotelian metaphysics, unknown to the Apostles and the early Church. The issue is less the substance of the doctrine than its formulation. As in other matters, here Rome needlessly and unwisely binds the consciences of the faithful instead of following the Fathers by allowing the Mysteries to be mysteries.
Hot take: I don't think this quote is very honorable. The Eucharist is a superabundant gift that Christ gave us, but He didn't have to give it to us. He very well could have given us a merely symbolic and memorial practice of the Lord's Supper. If He did, would we really be in a position to say "to Hell with it"? I don't think so.
But everything in the New Covenant has to be greater than what preceded it in the Old Covenant. So if the Eucharist is just a symbol, the manna from heaven would have to be greater, and that's not possible.
2 Samuel 23:17 KJV - is not this the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives? therefore he would not drink it. Not literal blood, here. Drinking the blood meant accept the result of these men putting their lives in jeopardy
1 Corinthians 11:27: "Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord
John 6: 53- 57 Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
I’m considered a Protestant. But I do believe in the literal Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. It happened from an encounter I had. And now I take it weekly. ❤🙏
@@lunaprescott5512 if you mean do we believe in the literal Presence of Christ in the elements, yes. And if you’re asking if I’ve confessed my sins, made a profession of faith and been baptized in the name of the Father , the Son and the Holy Spirit, then yes. 👍 We also examine ourselves to confess sin weekly before taking the elements. Furthermore, I believe the Eucharist is a mystery that causes me to worship. Christ said “this is My Body and this is My Blood. So I believe Him and I’ve experienced it firsthand, which changed my mind from thinking of it as a metaphor 💜🥹🙏
Once again, Jesus lays out clearly, long before you get to verse 63, that “Eating and Drinking” of the son is quite literally “coming and believing.” that is what satisfies the hunger and thirst that we all have. John 6 has nothing literally nothing to do with transubstantiation and the only way you can get there is if you throw in as much tradition as you can find.
That's an interesting opinion, especially as Jesus says that you must eat and drink of the flesh of the son of man to have life within you. And St. Paul later says if you don't discern the body (of Christ) but consume the body. You are eating and drinking judgment on yourself. It doesn't really take much tradition to throw at it, you can find quotes from the generation right after the apostles that talk about this like Justin Martyr and Ignatius of Antioch. You have your interpretation, that's fine. The guy who is literally a student of St. John, the apostle has his. My personal opinion is that John 6 as well as 1 Corinthians 11 and the witness of the earliest of the church fathers is enough to satisfy my reason that the church's doctrine on the Eucharist is the authentic teaching of Christ.
He simply doesn’t say that. You’re putting words in Jesus mouth. He says, “Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.” Both people who believe in transubstantiation and those who don’t have no problem with this verse.
Very uncharible to judge his intentions. Especially since he gave no indication that that was his intention, and even said what his intention was. And as far as the spirit of Christ, He beat people with whips and ruined someone's fig tree just to prove a point.
I just lost my job, and as the only income at home, I would appreciate some prayers. God's repay you❤
@@JIKonestep God be with you.
@@JIKonestep may God keep you and guide you with work. I'll pray to St. Joseph the worker, and don't give up. Amen
God bless you 🙏🏻❤ Will pray for you
@@JIKonestep God Bless you and God be with you brother.
JIKonestep God bless You. I'm in. 🙏🫂🌌
I just ordered mine!! Living in Savannah, this is going to be a great conversation starter.
Yeah, I love Savannah but it needs some True Presence to combat the demons.
@@judykelly5477 We have one of the most vibrant Catholic diocese in the Southeast. In my opinion.
@@craigsherman4480 oh wow, that is great to hear ! Your St. John the Baptist cathedral is stunning ✝️🤩
Yes waiting for mine. It arrives in 3 days. I’m so excited.
I got mine about 4 days ago, our Eucharistic Congress this Saturday....yeah, I guess I will wear it!!
The “hold on wait a minute” meme was so out of pocket 🤣
Love the shirt and Boom The Truth ! Those who refuse to believe You are walking away too !
@@delinayoungs3988 I bought the shirt from Jonathan’s website it arrives in 3 days I can’t wait.
You all need Jesus!
😂
This man is bringing masses (including my own family) through the Chosen.
It may not be your cup of tea, but God works in His own ways. Stop judging.
And He takes care of his people. Hence, Jonathan's idea to start the shirt. Tell me none of you have jobs??? The Chosen is done on donation.
Glass houses, all.
Let Jesus use this man as HE sees fit.
From a cradle Catholic that was brought back to the Church bc of The Chosen! 🙏🙌
May God Bless you all.
Precisely.
People who seek for perfection in evangelisation are being ridiculous. There isn't anything we can do here on earth with divine perfection that God would approve of fully and exactly.
So why would people have this expectation in evangelisation?
@alisterrebelo9013 absolutely! And one of the things I PRAYED over on coming back to the RC Church was if it was the true church, what God wanted, etc. And over and over again, I had in my head that God uses people in different ways because PEOPLE have different needs. We don't fit in a bucket. Only Divine guidance knows exactly what our souls and hearts need.
The theology behind the series is awesome. They went to great lengths to preserve Christianity and Judiasm AND draw people in.
Much love to you! 💜
I admit I have been hard on the Theology of the show, but they are doing good work leading non-believers in
I’m not interested in “all I need”. I’m interested in all Jesus Christ gives.
This all you need is Jesus nonsense is insipid Protestant nonsense.
Excellent interview
Is it just a coincidence that the 2 most influential portrayals of Christ are done by 2 Catholics?
@@jimghee6021 NOPE
Coincidence is a modern name from Holy Spirit 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
Which is the other one?
@@NP1066 Jim Caviezel in Passion of the Christ
Yes
Excellent questions and responses- excellent interview !
My one claim to fame now is that Jonathan Roumie borrowed my garment bag for the Eucharistic Congress. May God bless him for all that he does and for his willingness to speak the truth.
@@christopherevans4273 if you worship that bag read his shirt haha
That’s awesome, bro 😎
That’s very cool!!❤️🙏☘️
Amazing 👌😊
How did he borrow a garment bag? Do you work with him?
I was wondering what the deal was with that shirt! I've seen it on Jonathan a few times now! Thanks for the info!
Oh I know the story behind J.D. statement. My parish priests told us the story 10 yrs. Ago.
Good to see him refer to Protestans as Brothers and Sisters. We could do with a few more like him "on both sides of the fence".
Keep the content coming Matt!! We love you and Jonathan!!
Amen I love the shirt 👕 ❤
Glad I got to see this and hear the backstory of the tshirt! I hadn't understood it and was perplexed about it and even a little offended by it. And that didn't jive with my previous impression of Jonathan Roumie. So I really appreciate the clarification!
I love the shirt Jonathan thank youLord ❤
Shirts as conversation starters can be great. I remember wearing the original 40 Days for Life t-shirts, which only said "40 Days for Life". People I knew would stare, trying to figure out what it meant or what it was, since it didn't give away enough to answer that. It built curiosity. Eventually, they would ask what 40 Days for Life is. At that point, I can talk much more about it, because I'm answering their question, and I can frame how to introduce abortion into the conversation. After a few years, a different design said, "40 Days for Life - Pray to End Abortion". Not only did that make it less welcome in many places, but it gave away too much, so people didn't approach with curiosity. I was happy that the shirts eventually went back to the other design.
I received my official JR shirt two days ago. Wearing it today.
I need that shirt
I want his shirt! Where can I get one? Love Jonathan Roumie ❤️ God bless you always 🙏
Oh got it - at 03:31
It’s a Pro Catholic evangelization tool.
It’s relevant . I love it. Bought 2 on Amazon lol
it is an anti-sacrament confusion tool.
There's nothing wrong in defending the Truth. Our personal beliefs don't matter. It's the Truth that counts. If it's provocative, good!
Still, the Congress seemingly didn't address the elephant in the room, which is that the modern Church avoids radicalism, sacredness, silence, suffering, repentance, hell, etc. That so many bishops want the Tradition to be forgotten, the Church replaced with something new and fun...
But the return to Tradition is essential to a successful Eucharistic revival. Because there's no Eucharist without Tradition, and no Tradition without the Eucharist.
And what if the truth happens to be that the Lord's Supper is a symbolic, spiritual gesture? Have you considered Mark 14: 24-25? 24 And He said to them, “This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. 25 Truly I say to you, I will never again drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”
Jesus goes from figurative language to then going back to saying what is in the cup is wine.
@@ToeTag1968 Because in some sense it is both. The Church teaches that it's the substance (the being) that changes, but accidents (appearances) remain that of bread and "of the fruit of the vine".
The ancient Jewish Passover celebration didn't use a symbol or metaphor of a lamb, but flesh of an actual living lamb selected and sacrificed for that very purpose. It was both a memorial and a thanksgiving sacrifice representing the original sacrifice made in Egypt.
And that's why Jesus instituted a new Passover celebration, with Him as the Lamb, sacrificed every time we celebrate it, as a memorial and thanksgiving sacrifice of Jesus, by Jesus, for us, to the Father.
@@damnedmadman Interesting point to ponder. Also consider that the lamb was slaughtered (dead) and then cooked and eaten. It was a temporary stop-gap until our perfect Lord offered himself up. The eating of the lamb didn't forgive sins. It was the sacrifice to God that wiped the slate clean.
Jesus is a living sacrifice. Once dead, buried, resurrected. In a sense, we can consider the spiritual/symbolic act of "digesting" or internalizing the knowledge of what He did on the cross. Eating human flesh and drinking blood was well outside the bounds of the Levitical laws. The people of the time would have better understood. And, Jesus confirms in John 6:63. It's not the flesh, it's a spiritual thing. God bless and thanks for the dialogue!
@@ToeTag1968 But it's not human flesh and blood. And if His flesh profited nothing, Jesus wouldn't spend so much time (and lose disciples) speaking about how essential it is to eat His flesh... The word flesh has several meanings. I really recommend you check out some latest videos from the "Shameless Popery Podcast" that analyze John 6 specifically. Very interesting and fun to watch.
@@ToeTag1968
If Jesus was speaking figuratively then why did He say, "this (bread) is my body?" Shouldn't He have said, "My body is bread"?
I love Flannery O'Connor...that is my favorite of her quotes.
It's a disgusting, irreverent quote.
@@Joe-uw5rv Because...?
I don't think I've ever been shocked at something Catholic to the point of saying "that's blasphemy".
You know... why this war? Protestants believe it's a symbol. That's their understanding of scripture. Not because they are negligent or heretical. When I read the scripture, I don't see transubstantiation. Only a possibility of it. It's a maybe. You have to take something figurative as literal to come up with that belief.
Transubstantiation cannot be proved from scripture. It's a church belief that was handed down. Protestants only accept the scriptures. They take the Lord's supper very seriously, though. They examine themselves, it is a solemn moment to renew repentance. That's really important. it's critical. It's not to be mocked!
This is like me mocking Mary in some way. I would not do that! Even if I don't believe Mary is divine. I would not spit on another's sacred belief. It's disgusting to do that.
No, this shirt is not cool at all. I do not think God is happy with it. It's mocking one of his Sacraments. Even if you do not see it as a sacrament. It is. I think this is actually very serious. Telling God to shove his Sacrament to hell ??!
You need to fear God
For the nth time, that's a misconception that Catholics believe that Mary is divine. Although we ask for her intercession, we only venerate her. We might look like we praise her, but truly in our hearts we treat her as our mother, not a God.
Also, the belief of the transubstantiation is in the bible (John 6: 53-57)
Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
54
Whoever eats* my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55
For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
57
Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
Thank you for so eloquently speaking for us Back slidden Protestants.😂 j/k In all seriousness the Lords Super,Holy Communion or The Eucharist is not taken lightly in the Protestant faith. Raised as a Southern Baptist if you were not Baptized you should not partake in the Lords Super. I think that should speak volumes to our Catholic or Non Protestant Brothers and Sisters. 🙏
And Jesus said to them, “I assure you and most solemnly say to you, unless you eat the flesh ( which is the Word or the Bible )of the Son of Man and drink His blood [unless you believe in Me as Savior and believe in the saving power of My blood which will be shed for you], you do not have life in yourselves. After reading the comments and doing some research it seems to take on a very different perspective in the Catholic Faith almost Dark and Metaphysical. This is a very divisive issue. Nothing Divisive comes from the Father nor does Confusion come from the Father. I am grateful for this opportunity to become more enlightened regarding this topic. May God continually Bless you and Keep You
@@MIMI-D If your interpretation is the true one, why would His followers murmur and say "This saying is hard"? It's because they knew exactly what He meant...literally eating His Flesh and Blood. Please re-read the Bread of Life discourse. Peace.
@@diamondlou1 no wonder Jesus got so frustrated with them. You actually believe he was telling them to eat him and drink his blood. You can’t possibly believe that. This whole divisive Catholic Protestant thing was started by one Group. We both know who that was. This bickering sounds like the Pharisees and their legalistic ways. C u N Heaven
love the editing 🤣🤣🤣
Amen!
Amen Amen!
Nice clip. I really enjoyed how open he is about his faith. I am much less inclined to be so forthcoming.
Amazing
I got the white color ❤
Please fix the quote on the shirt to her actual quote. "If it's "just" a symbol". It is an important distinction and could help the understanding between Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants. I was going to order the shirt to wear in my theology classes but the missing word sort of defeats the point I am trying to make with my students about the authentic meaning of symbolism. The Eucharist is a symbol but it is more than a mere arbitrary symbol. It is a true symbol in that it is a visible manifestation of an invisible reality. It is a real participation in the body and blood of Christ. The substance is Christ and is truly present but that does not mean it is not a symbol.
I really wish the shirt said JUST a symbol. The Eucharist is both a symbol and a reality. The logic of the shirt doesn’t reflect the Catholic Church teaching.
Where from the Catholic Church did you get the info that it's also a symbol?
And the USCCB states that “ The transformed bread and wine are truly the Body and Blood of Christ and are not merely symbols. When Christ said “This is my body” and “This is my blood,” the bread and wine are transubstantiated.” The implication when they say it’s not merely a sign is that it is both a sign and a reality.
The Catholic Church teaches i must particpate in the Eucharist to be saved, but you would deny this protestant Christian the ability to do so.
yo también quiero una
I was disappointed they didnt do the Transfiguration scene. Missed opportunity imo. I havent finished the most recent season, but plan on it. The scene where Jesus anounces His church passing authority to Peter was less than ideal, left room for "interpretation". They take a lot of "artistic" liberties, BUT Jesus comes off like the one I've always imagined in my mind. Great depiction of Jesus.
I'm sure the vagueness of the Peter scene was intentional. They're trying to appeal to all Christians not just Catholics obviously.
@matthew7491 oh I get that, I feel many interpretations can only exist through the more modern view absent of Jewish beliefs of the time of Jesus and the translation not fully capturing the Greek. I know people that think Peter is just a nickname for Simon. They actually call Simon the Zealot as Simon Peter the Zealot.
@@Yeoman530 it’s ironic too. The Rock part of what Jesus said isn’t even the clincher. It’s the keys. He gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom. That has a very specific meaning referring to a very specific official position in the kingdom of the son of David (and other ancient kingdoms, eg Joseph in Pharoah’s Egypt). It’s basically the prime minister on steroids. What the key holder says is taken to be the same as the king saying it.
what you see as a good thing i see as a very bad thing. if a depiction makes you feel good about *your* mental image of god, then it is like you are just talking to yourself. god has no time for your preconcieved notions.
@Gwyll_Arboghast I said nothing of my feelings besides disappointment.
The depiction of Jesus is objectively one of the best ever, and it resonates with everyone probably because they did an objectively great job.
I don't speak to voices in my head. I have no idea where you got that from.
Finally, God is eternal, which means He has all the time in the world. He rewards me for following His Will, the Holy Spirit is with me, Jesus loves me, and I share that love with everyone that lets me.
In honor of St. Michael's Lent, let us 🙏 pray:
St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him we humbly pray; and do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, thrust into hell satan, and all evil spirits, who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.
GBY 🇻🇦 ✝️
He should edit it and put the correct quote :)
seems like the actual quote JUST makes more sense.
I'm taking a leap here...but I'm guessing JR got the quote from Bishop Barron. I'm reading the bishop's book "This is My Body" and on p.69 also uses the quote without the "just".
I was hoping for an explanation, perhaps a reference to something that O'Connor wrote about this quote. The best that I could find was that she stood up and said it at some literary conference.
She apparently was at a dinner party and the only Catholic. The hostess remarked that the Eucharist "...is a symbol but a pretty good one." That's when O'Connor commented "If it's [just] a symbol..."
Sounds cannibalistic, if not symbolic...One might even say vampiristic...
Yeah that's what early critics used to say 😅
And that's why many of his followers "returned to their former way of life." It was a "hard saying," and they refused to believe it, sadly.
@@diamondlou1 I think for a 1st century Jew to engage in cannibalism and the drinking of blood would be virtually impossible. The of course there is the abstaining from blood in ACTS...
@@paulsacramento5995 Yep. It was a 'hard saying' but Jesus didn't back down. Fortunately the early Church took Him seriously.
Can we have more impressions from Jonathan, please! That was a solid yet understated impression.
Where can we find the shirt?
So does this mean you could put the sign of the cross to hell with it? If it’s only a symbol
I didn't know the sign of the cross comes to life.
Why was the word JUST omitted
I got two! Love o Connor and the quote too.
AMEN 🙏
My jiu jitsu instructor looks exactly like that Jesus guy
I get the sentiment, but the quote is actually mistaken from any traditional Catholic perspective. The Eucharist is a symbol, but not only a symbol, for it makes present what it represents. The quote describes the Sacrament purely in opposition to the reformed view, rather than expressing the fullness of our faith.
you're on the right track, but a symbol is not a representation. that would be just a sign. a symbol is precisely what you are describing: not a representation but an actual presentation.
the quote loses us the battle by admitting materialist premises.
IT IS 1000% NOT A SYMBOL IN ANY WAY. NOT A SYMBOL. IT IS THE BODY, BLOOD, SOUL & DIVINITY OF THE SECOND PERSON OF THE BLESSED TRINITY. IT IS NOT SYMBOLIC IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. THIS IS HERESY.
Beautiful symbols are to be honored. Not worshipped.
Happy non catholic 😊
You have to now how to worship correctly to even know what is worship and what is not. If the person isn’t worshipping something no one can say they are.
I always thought it meant something along the lines of "He must increase, but I must decrease." Jonathan is just a symbol, He is not the real Christ.
As a Catholic, I have taken great issue with the language used on the T-Shirt. Catechism 1131: "The sacraments are efficacious SIGNS of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us. The visible rites by which the sacraments are celebrated SIGNIFY and make present the graces proper to each sacrament. They bear fruit in those who receive them with the required dispositions." The Eucharist is both the Real Presence and is a SIGN! I have seen various quotes from O'Connor some inserting the word "just a Symbol" in which case that would be a correct representation of our Faith.
The Eucharist is BOTH the Real BODY BLOOD SOUL and DIVINITY of CHRIST ANNNNND it is a SYMBOL!!!! To say the Eucharsit is not a symbol is against our Catholic teaching. Words are very important, and without the word "just" we are no longer adequetly representing the true teachings of the Catholic Church. I would reccomend Catholics to not wear or purchase the shirt or advocate for it. The Sacraments are perfect/effacacious symbols in which they actually do what they signify CCC 1127. I would hope you would respond to this in a follow up video. I love you both Matt and Jonathan and know that you are not promoting this with any sort of intention for misinterpriting Catholic Teaching. I feel as this is something most Catholics miss in the "technicalities" but these small Truths do still matter.
So it's a symbol?? Where does the Catholic church teach it's a symbol??
@@soldierofmary984 I sited two sources in the catechism of the Catholic Church. It is both the real presence and a symbol. It is an efficacious symbol in which it is what it signifies.
It's a very irreverent quote. The problem with this quote, among other things, is that it doesn't even make sense. Even if it were just a symbol, it wouldn't be proper to say "to hell with it." Let's take a painting of Jesus -the qualities it may have symbolize something about Jesus. Could we really say that because the painting is only a symbol to hell with it?
@@Joe-uw5rv beg to adamantly disagree.
@@DarlowMaxwell
So the cross is a symbol - can you say "to hell with it"?
@@Joe-uw5rvIs the cross actually alive?
@@lunaprescott5512
What do you mean, which cross?
What’s the meaning of the shirt? I was hoping the shirt would be explained in this clip. Not a Roman Catholic. So idk.
All churches founded by the Apostles from time of Christ on up to now believe the Eucharist to be the actual presence of Christ.
After the Protestant Reformation, Protestants (especially Evangelicals) did away with the Eucharist saying it’s just a “symbol”.
@@jbm0745 is that the last supper?
it comes from a failure to clarify a misunderstanding. liberal christians say 'it is a symbol, therefore it isnt really christ's flesh', and this abysmal misunderstanding of symbol infected the conservatives who said 'well then it's not a symbol'.
@@Gwyll_Arboghast ohhh ok I get it now. Well Jesus spoke in analogy all the time. Most of the time actually. So why would you think the bread was actually his flesh?
@@jbm0745I was raised Southern Baptist and we always had communion or your Eucharist. Now I am a non denominational Christian and we take it every service. So I’m not understanding the “Protestant” reference . Are you saying they don’t take the blood and body seriously or just don’t have it at all. Isn’t that kind of a broad categorization. I am of 2 denominations and it was or never will be some flippant act of Symbolism. We take this very seriously . The only difference is we don’t use Wine and we don’t all drink from the same cup . I have had communion many times at a morning mass I used to attend. Please help me understand what I am missing. Ty
i would purchase a womens 2 xl with a v neck please
"if its not a symbol to hell with it" is the most idiotic thing you could say. Why is some actor even being interviewed? who cares?
If it *isnt* a symbol, to hell with it.
If it’s merely a symbol, it’s just bread. That’s nothing and kind of pointless. But since it isn’t a symbol, it’s Jesus’ flesh. Your rewording says if it’s Jesus’ flesh then to hell with it. I surely hope that isn’t your intended meaning.
@@tylerdean3489 'merely' is not a word that i used. it is bread, that is a fact. the question is what else is it. is it 'merely' bread? no.
but you and this fellow have the whole thing backward. your reaction to my way of putting it is the same as my reaction to F OConnor's way of putting it. if it is jesus' flesh, it is a symbol.
no matter what you consider the boundaries of the term 'symbol', denying symbol is to castrate the sacrament.
simply bread and no other meaning is nothing and pointless. but likewise literal flesh is not in itself meaningful. merely flesh gets you no further than merely bread.
@@Gwyll_Arboghast "Merely" was in reference to it being a symbol, not bread. It's not "merely" a symbol. It's a reality. It both is the flesh of Jesus Christ and a symbol of the new Covenant.
Jesus's flesh is a big deal. Since it's Jesus's flesh, it is literally Jesus. God is altogether simple (not composite) and so to have Jesus's flesh is to have the totality of Jesus. Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. We partake and eat Jesus's flesh since he said if we do, He has life because of the Father and we will have life because of Him. It's pivotal and incredible important that we have the Eucharist!!! How on earth can you say that Jesus's flesh is not meaningful. It is the very same flesh that suffered, died and rose again that we eat. We eat Jesus. That is meaningful. If you don't think it's meaningful to have Jesus physically present, why even be Christian at all?
@@tylerdean3489 you have failed to explain how it is meaningful, you only repeated several times that it is. if you were to explain *why* it is meaningful, you would be invoking symbolism.
when you eat 'mere flesh', as you do with a chicken, it is a *part* of the animal. that the eucharist is the totality of jesus is a statement that it is not mere flesh. that is a symbolic claim. when you eat a chicken, you consume it and it is gone. that we eat the same flesh that suffered and rose puts it beyond mere flesh. another symbolic claim.
all this is why invoking the term "mere" is to suffer a misunderstanding from the beginning. symbolism is precisely what makes something not merely its substance.
to be clear, i am not saying it is less than what you are saying it is; what i'm saying is that the essence of your description is right, but when you say something like "it isnt a symbol", you throw the whole thing out.
@@Gwyll_Arboghast So I think we may have a mutual understanding then, the Eucharist has meaning because of whose flesh it is. It's Jesus's flesh which has intrinsic meaning. It's also a symbol for that which it is, so it's a symbol and the thing signified. It's a symbol of His flesh, and it is His flesh. It's a symbol of His sacrifice, and His sacrifice re-presented to the Father. Maybe I'm still misunderstanding your position but yes I agree, it's not merely flesh. It's Jesus's flesh, both as a symbol and a reality.
I'm more interested to hear his take on the 'Pride' paraphernalia that was on the set of his show.
Which show? What pride paraphernalia? Who's show?
@helenemakuch8366 one member of the filming crew had a pride flag on his camera. We could see it in one video that showed the back stage filming of season 4. And the director made clear that he is not profiling the crew to be Christans to work on the Chosen. It's ridiculous to assume that people that work in the show is free of sin and they might even be in a process of conversion by working on it. The flag was not in the show. So woe to silly people and their stones
@@ForgeMondes A lot obfuscation and straw men in that response. How is pointing out that these flags were on the show's set throwing stones or silly? How am I assuming people on the show are free of sin?
@charlessteadman2518 forgive me if it sounded unnecessarily accusatory. You are right and I might have vented frustration à little too much over there. Throwing stones was more intended as a metaphor for Hyper focusing in a little detail on the set (not even the show itself) when is so unnecessary compared to good the show can and is bringing. (Despite the many artistic choices that can diminish the message of Scriptures). But again I offer an apology for my tone. Is not as if ranting on a comment section is going to bring change in the world 😮💨 Blessings from this side of the globe 🙏
@@ForgeMondes No need to apologize. Let's pray for one another 🙏
Alright, I love the Chosen as much as the next guy but is it being edgy or just inappropriate? Ik it’s a quote but I’m confused, is it cussing or not?
If it's JUST a symbol, to hell with it. It is a symbol, but not JUST a symbol
i agree with a better version of your point, but the idea of something being 'just a symbol' is ridiculous. there is no such thing as 'just a symbol'
IT IS 1000% NOT A SYMBOL IN ANY WAY. NOT A SYMBOL. IT IS THE BODY, BLOOD, SOUL & DIVINITY OF THE SECOND PERSON OF THE BLESSED TRINITY. IT IS NOT SYMBOLIC IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. THIS IS HERESY.
I am glad it is edgy...I hope he wears it on the set...Protestants (which I was one) need to see and hear the truth. The Chosen doesn't push the TRUE Jesus enough.
True tho. It seems like they only want Jesus to appear cool
If it was a symbol, you'd tell God to hell with it? Who do you serve?
How offensive.
If “it” is something Jesus commanded, I would be very wary of saying ‘to hell with it”, regardless of what “it” is.
This really smacks of a truly arrogant attitude … disappointing.
This explained nothing
Eucharist IS a symbol! All of the sacraments are! That is how Church talks about them! If it's a symbol it does not mean it's not real!!!
WRONG. The Sacraments are "outward signs instituted by Christ to give grace".
IT IS 1000% NOT A SYMBOL IN ANY WAY. NOT A SYMBOL. IT IS THE BODY, BLOOD, SOUL & DIVINITY OF THE SECOND PERSON OF THE BLESSED TRINITY. IT IS NOT SYMBOLIC IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. THIS IS HERESY.
@@jenns6063 I'm sorry friend, but you just don't understand what the word symbol means. Greek word "mysterion" was usually translated with "symbollum" by the lain fathers to talk about the sacraments. Read Tertulian, Augustine and others.
@@jenns6063
It's both a symbol and a reality.
@@jenns6063yikes isn’t that kind of splitting hairs. Outward sign vs symbol. Off white vs Ecru
Again the catholic are missing the point! As if taking in your wine and bread saves you! It is living like JESUS, it is loving God and loving your Neighbor. It is a symbol but also a call to do as Jesus did. Tell me what is easier? Drinking wine and eating bread or loving your neighbor(who can be anyone). Please don't be so legalistic like the pharisees! God is after your HEART! Though I am not catholic you are still my brothers and I pray for you and love you!
Dear Catholics: You’re not the only Christians who believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist. You’re just the only ones required to believe in a medieval scholastic explanation of it.
Thank you 🙏
?? Medieval scholastic explanation? Please clarify. TIA.
@@diamondlou1 transubstantiation
The Greeks & Syriacs also have an identical description of the metaphysics as described in the doctrine of Transubstantiation, & from what I understand their articulations are older than that of St. Thomas Aquinas’. The polemics against the Catholic doctrine seem only to be reactionary from Protestants, & some Orthodox who do not even understand their own doctrinal history.
@@DarthVeers2 Lutherans, Anglicans, and Eastern Orthodox all hold to robust doctrines of the Real Presence without binding themselves to Scholastic definitions, rooted in Aristotelian metaphysics, unknown to the Apostles and the early Church. The issue is less the substance of the doctrine than its formulation. As in other matters, here Rome needlessly and unwisely binds the consciences of the faithful instead of following the Fathers by allowing the Mysteries to be mysteries.
Hot take: I don't think this quote is very honorable. The Eucharist is a superabundant gift that Christ gave us, but He didn't have to give it to us. He very well could have given us a merely symbolic and memorial practice of the Lord's Supper. If He did, would we really be in a position to say "to Hell with it"? I don't think so.
I agree!
The world was destroyed when people ate something off a tree, the world was saved when people ate something off a tree.
But everything in the New Covenant has to be greater than what preceded it in the Old Covenant. So if the Eucharist is just a symbol, the manna from heaven would have to be greater, and that's not possible.
Yeah good point. If the situation were different it would definitely be different. 🙄
@@RobertPatton-kz6lq😂😂😂 this took me a second and once it clicked I couldn’t stop giggling
2 Samuel 23:17 KJV - is not this the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives? therefore he would not drink it.
Not literal blood, here. Drinking the blood meant accept the result of these men putting their lives in jeopardy
1 Corinthians 11:27: "Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord
@@jkbugout 🤦🏻♀️
John 6: 53- 57
Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
57 Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
However Jesus is not just man, He is also divine and without sin.
It's not an awesome shirt. It's offensive to pious ears.
The protestants in the comments today 🙄
I’m considered a Protestant. But I do believe in the literal Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. It happened from an encounter I had. And now I take it weekly. ❤🙏
@@Kris77777 Consider becoming Catholic or Orthodox
@@Kris77777Is transubstantiation in your church? Have you been through the sacraments in order to receive the Eucharist?
@@lunaprescott5512 if you mean do we believe in the literal Presence of Christ in the elements, yes. And if you’re asking if I’ve confessed my sins, made a profession of faith and been baptized in the name of the Father , the Son and the Holy Spirit, then yes. 👍 We also examine ourselves to confess sin weekly before taking the elements. Furthermore, I believe the Eucharist is a mystery that causes me to worship. Christ said “this is My Body and this is My Blood. So I believe Him and I’ve experienced it firsthand, which changed my mind from thinking of it as a metaphor 💜🥹🙏
“To hell with the sacrament if it doesn’t mean what I think it means!” Prideful sacrilege, it’s a spit in the face of Gods mystery.
I think you guys are the ones who are spitting on God's mystery. Read John 6: 53-57
@@Cheezegazelle In your pride you will say “to hell with the sacrament” if it doesn’t conform to your understanding of what it does.
Disgusting.
Once again, Jesus lays out clearly, long before you get to verse 63, that “Eating and Drinking” of the son is quite literally “coming and believing.” that is what satisfies the hunger and thirst that we all have. John 6 has nothing literally nothing to do with transubstantiation and the only way you can get there is if you throw in as much tradition as you can find.
That's an interesting opinion, especially as Jesus says that you must eat and drink of the flesh of the son of man to have life within you. And St. Paul later says if you don't discern the body (of Christ) but consume the body. You are eating and drinking judgment on yourself. It doesn't really take much tradition to throw at it, you can find quotes from the generation right after the apostles that talk about this like Justin Martyr and Ignatius of Antioch. You have your interpretation, that's fine. The guy who is literally a student of St. John, the apostle has his. My personal opinion is that John 6 as well as 1 Corinthians 11 and the witness of the earliest of the church fathers is enough to satisfy my reason that the church's doctrine on the Eucharist is the authentic teaching of Christ.
He simply doesn’t say that. You’re putting words in Jesus mouth. He says, “Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.” Both people who believe in transubstantiation and those who don’t have no problem with this verse.
did you miss 'take eat, this is my body'?
@@TheCatholicNerd 👏👏👏
Did you miss "My Flesh is TRUE food and My Blood is TRUE drink"...? Verse 55.
He seems like a nice man. I just couldn't stomach the awful "Chosen" series.
@@michelleishappy4036 Me either!
It's really terrible. Cheesy and full of blasphemy.
What is your reason for disliking the series?
What was the blasphemy stuff? I got annoyed by all the side plots.
I think its great. People said the same thing about Michelangelo
The T-shirt is a smug orthodoxy a million miles away from the Spirit of Christ - glad you're making money out of it maybe sell a few indulgences too.
Very uncharible to judge his intentions. Especially since he gave no indication that that was his intention, and even said what his intention was.
And as far as the spirit of Christ, He beat people with whips and ruined someone's fig tree just to prove a point.
Dude, only thing that's smug is your comment. lol
Wheres the smugness? Bold, perhaps, not smug tho
I’m praying that you wrote this without any self congratulation yourself ;)
Would Christ enjoy the negatively and bickering in YT comments?
To me the smugness of people like Zwingli was even more dangerous. Smugness as in: "1500 years of church theology? Ha! I know better"
isnt this dude pro🏳️🌈?
No.
Nope
Didn't Flannery O'Connor actually say, "If it's JUST a symbol, to hell with it"? Did Jonathan purposefully leave out the "just" from the phrase?