/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

The Holy Eucharist is Jesus Christ, why not come to a Catholic Church this Sunday and meet Him?

>>808954

>t. Has never heard of the Luminous Mysteries

Top 10 anime bruh moments

Kek, this is the silliest post I've read all week. Firstly, the Nicene Creed says more than just "Jesus":

<I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages, God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father… "

…So Jesus Christ being the Son of God is made quite clear. Secondly, the Anglicans, Lutherans, and many other Protestant sects use the Nicene Creed as well, so does that mean they do not know God the Son either?

>Maybe the Church has put too much emphasis on the Son-part, and not so much on the God-Son part

One could say the same about Evangelicals placing so little emphasis on God the Father, and equating the Holy Spirit with a dopamine rush.

>>808968

I’m speaking about layman Catholics, not Catholic dogma. What do layman Catholics mean when they say they believe in God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost?

>>808969

I've never heard a layman Catholic say that, and I'm beginning to suspect you're a Baptist shitposter.

>>808970

Here you go https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuUwEZwBRCI

You have two separate instances of this happening at 6:36 (he even calls it classic catholicism) and 6:49

Maybe this is just a German thing… I don't know

>>808972

Interesting… I apologize for jumping to conclusions. It seems to me that (assuming it isn't a German-to-English translation error on the uploader's part) those are two individuals who either have a poor understanding of the Trinity and do not represent the entirety of Catholics or, based on that "classical Catholic" response (I'm not exactly sure what that means), they subscribe to the early Church's understanding of God (see: the Apostles' Creed) and are therefore in contradiction with Catholic teachings. By the way, you mentioned previously that

>I’m speaking about layman Catholics, not Catholic dogma

All Catholics say the Nicene Creed at Mass, so it's more than just dogma. They should know the Trinity by heart, unless they're cultural Catholics who couldn't care less.

And here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jesus/Archive_133

scroll down and you will see this comment:

<This article says that most christians believe that Jesus is incarnation of God, but this is incorrect, because the most christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God, not God and it's not just non-trinitarians denominations who believe that Jesus is the Son of God, the most catholics believe that Jesus is the Son of God, not God. An example is me and my family, me and my family are catholics and we believe that Jesus is the Son of God, not God and the most people i've met believe that Jesus is the Son of God and these people are catholics, so the most christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God, not God.

I'm NOT NOT NOT saying that Catholic dogma denies the Sons divinity. What I'm saying is simply that because the emphasis has been on the Son of God, people are uneducated on the matter. Layman people recognize the Father as God, but not the Son or the Holy Spirit. The Arts have something to do with this too. Why do people speak about a "bearded old man" old man when they envision God? It's because they don't know what Christians mean by the trinity, they assume that only the Father is God.

>>808975

>All Catholics say the Nicene Creed at Mass, so it's more than just dogma. They should know the Trinity by heart, unless they're cultural Catholics who couldn't care less.

Okey, I didn't know this. Do they say something like: "I believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit"? If yes, then it would be strange to why some still are confused the matter.

ps I'm not a baptist, I'm not even a Christian. I'm just a person who's learning about the Catholic faith and hope to convert soon.

>>808976

That looks like it was typed up by an adolescent who (mistakenly) believes that "Son of God" and "God" exclude one another. Heaven knows I spouted a lot of stupid things on the Internet when I was a child. I still do sometimes, kek.

>>808978

>Do they say something like: "I believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit"?

Yes, except it's usually more wordy than that. Additionally, when we cross ourselves during Mass, the priest says "In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.", and we (the parishioners) affirm that with an "Amen". Likewise, when we cross ourselves outside of Mass, we say (be it verbally or mentally) "In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.", so the Trinity should be clear to everyone who calls themselves Catholic.

>If yes, then it would be strange to why some still are confused the matter

That is indeed strange. Perhaps they're just cultural Catholics who fell out of Church at a young age and, for that reason, have a poor understanding of Catholicism.

>I'm just a person who's learning about the Catholic faith and hope to convert soon

I'm glad to hear it anon! I'm in the process of converting myself (my Confirmation is next month).

>>808984

Thanks for the explanation and God bless

>>808954

>>808978

You might be interested in this then:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLbDsxw-e0m3mIkapUEZ_-5BEOr19F4t73

The reason you're (rightly) observing this phenomenon, is likely related to the issue discussed in the embedded vid.

Catholic here. I'm not a native English speaker, and I've heard, in my language, the word "God" is used to mean "God the Father" when talking colloquially. This does not mean that they're confused. When asked about the Trinity you could hear someone say something along the lines of "It consists of Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit". God means God, the Father. It's treated like his name, just like Jesus is the name of God the Son. So, again, when used colloquially, God has this double meaning of "God the Father" and "God - God". You could say it's a polysemic word.This does not mean people don't understand that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit all have the same divine nature. It's not a dogma or faith issue, but a language one. Is it confusing? Honestly, I had never noticed until I saw this thread. In mass and in the creed the trinity is laid clearly enough to every catholic.

>>808954

Not sure if Nestorian or abject fool

>>808954

> Is this something that you have encountered as well amongst layman Catholics?

Yes

>Should the Church do a better job at teaching the Trinity?

Yes

>who knows of Jesus, doesn't know about his divinity.

Yes

>Maybe the Church has put too much emphasis on the Son-part, and not so much on the God-Son part.

Agreed.

I know many lapsed believers and many layman Catholics who don't know the fundamentals of what it is to be a Christian. The current consensus of the masses is that a Christian is similar to jehova witnesses in regards to theology. IE - God > some guy called Jesus with the title Son of God without knowing what the means and has no connection to God.

These days I always start conversations by pointing out the most obvious thing in Christian theology. That Jesus is God. Admittedly before my conversion I had no idea about this either, its something that elder people that know their faith probably take for granted and don't realize people don't know this due to the emphasis on Son of God. Rather than pointing out His divinity constantly.

I won't say it's truly indicative of anyone's Trinitarian beliefs, but casually speaking, some people don't speak like Trinitarians. I'm just surprised Catholics would be in that category. They pride themselves on St. Peter being the first bishop of their church, and he's most famous for being first to realize how profound Jesus' incarnation really was. I'd usually guess that it's a Protestant habit to forget this instead.

I mean, to me this is why Protestants recoil at titles for Mary like "Mother of God". Because it hasn't actually sunk in to them that Jesus is God. Therefore "Mother of God" is an appropriate title for her. They may confess that Jesus is God when formally pressed, but it hasn't seemed to sink into their subconscious and they end up letting it slip out that they don't like these terms for Mary, for example. They hate it even. Which is more than mere disagreement or semantics. Something is actually alarming them somehow, no different than a Muslim or Jew.

>>809069

>I'm not a native English speaker, and I've heard, in my language, the word "God" is used to mean "God the Father" when talking colloquially.

The same thing happens in English unfortunately.

>God means God, the Father. It's treated like his name, just like Jesus is the name of God the Son.

>This does not mean that they're confused.

Those are mutually exclusive statements. If Christians are using the name "God" to refer to The Father, under any circumstance, they're confused, period. The fact that this isn't even noticeable to most Christians like yourself just speaks to how widespread the confusion is. God as the Trinity is what separates us from Jews and Muslims, yet many Christians haven't even internalized this fact. This is what happens when you adopt the Filioque.

>>809096

>This is what happens when you adopt the Filioque.

Could you give me a brief explanation of the Filioque and why the Catholic position I wrong and how that relates to what we are discussing?

>>809246

watch the embedded vids of:

>>809096

>>809051

>>809096

>If Christians are using the name "God" to refer to The Father, under any circumstance, they're confused, period.

"Credo in Deum,

Patrem omnipotentem,

Creatorem caeli et terrae."

Is the Apostles Creed confused? I think your statement might be a bit too strong. Using the name "God" to refer to the Father is not necessarily a sign of confusion. Regarding the Filioque, it's obvious to anyone that studies History that it was a political move more than anything else, but I fail to see it being too pertinent to the topic at hand.

In general, every Catholic here is probably able to avoid any confusion between the Father and God. When it comes to your regular granny who goes to mass to pray so her nice will pass her exams… well, the situation may be different.

>>809343

>"Credo in Deum,

>Patrem omnipotentem,

>Creatorem caeli et terrae."

>Is the Apostles Creed confused?

That's too short of a quotation to provide context, and there is an important comma separating the statement of belief in God from the descriptions of who God is. The first description is of the Creator/Father, yes, but then it says:

>et in Iesum Christum, Filium Eius unicum

<and in Jesus Christ, his only son

so who is that "his" referring to? You're suggesting it's referring to the label "God", and that "God" is then referring to the Father only, but the sentence structure doesn't strictly imply that interpretation. It can just as well be using "his" to refer to the Creator that was just mentioned, leaving the initial "I believe in God" statement to encompass all of the subsequent descriptions of the persons of the trinity, which makes a lot more sense than implying the church fathers were so loose and colloquial with their language for such a foundational creed. It is not the church fathers who were confused about this distinction, it's modern Christians projecting their modern confusions onto them.

>Using the name "God" to refer to the Father is not necessarily a sign of confusion.

No, but repeat it enough times, and teach it to enough people without a firm understanding of the trinity or what separates our God from the idol of the Muslims and Jews, and it can certainly cause a lot of confusion. The sheer fact that the concepts of "judeo-christian" and "Abrahamic religions" exist, shows just how confused the world has become about this.

>Regarding the Filioque, it's obvious to anyone that studies History that it was a political move more than anything else

Yes, Rome was pressured to adopt a lot of things to distance itself from Byzantium under the rule of the Frankish empire. But the origin of the Filioque isn't what matters here, the issue is with the effects this change had. It doesn't matter what caused the house fire, it only matters that the house is now burnt down. Yet instead of trying to fix or rebuild the house, Christians continue to insist that the burnt house is perfectly fine the way it is, even though believing the spirit proceeds from the Logos invites much misinterpretation about several things, only one of which is the relationship between the persons of the trinity. If you're repeatedly taught that it goes: Father > Son > Holy Spirit, it's not surprising then that it leads to people having a strict hierarchical view of the trinity, where literally only the Father is the real Most High, leaving them confused about who the "Real God" is. Presenting the trinity with an ambiguous separation of roles and a simple hierarchical structure, just invites people to believe there's somehow a "God within a God", which is absolutely not a Christian teaching.

>In general, every Catholic here is probably able to avoid any confusion between the Father and God.

great, but /christian/ (and image boards, or niche online communities in general) doesn't tend to reflect the real world very much. The video in >>809096 gives plenty of examples of real-world Christians making this "God" = "The Father" mistake, without seemingly being aware that it's the trinity Christians are supposed to worship. That's why you see a lot of modern people complain about "the Christian God" and yet simultaneously admire "Jesus". This is literally the same confusion that led to the widespread adoption of Arianism in the early church. If it wasn't fine then, then it shouldn't be fine now.