The Case for ‘Catholic Communion’ – #44

The Case for Catholic Communion

[00:00:00]

Introduction

CA: And I’m sorry, those of you catching this on demand, you don’t realize it, but I was doing this space and then I forgot to hit record, so I had to stop the music, start the music again. Anyway, here we are. Thank you for joining me. Whether you are catching me live, nobody is, or on demand, hopefully lots of people are, but according to the metrics, nobody is.

Thank you for joining me on this X Spaces session. Um, I may do a video on this at a later date. I, I don’t know if it’s even worth it.

Topic Introduction: Holy Communion

CA: Um, we’re talking about the case to Protestants for Holy Communion, or what they call Catholic Communion, namely the Real Presence. Let me fade that music out and tell you why I’m doing this.

TikTok Video Response to Protestant Apologist

CA: So, I dropped a video on TikTok., it was a video of me responding to a Protestant apologist who was going around, it seemed like what he was doing was randomly picking out people and asking them questions about their Christian beliefs, and then he sank his teeth into a Catholic. Like, The Catholic was doing okay, standing up for himself and for, [00:01:00] and for the Catholic faith.

But the Protestant evangelist in the video was really kind of focusing and honing in on Holy Communion, and that the Mass is yet another sacrifice, and this and that, and he specifically used the term, well, don’t Catholics believe that, You know, it’s a remembrance. Jesus said it’s a remembrance, you know, and the implication is, you know, you’re supposed to remember him.

What does that have to do with eating his flesh? It’s just a remembrance. My response to that was explaining what a remembrance is. If you don’t, if you’ve never seen that video response, I don’t know where it came from. It was from either a prior episode of the Catholic Experience. It might have been something I did special for locals.

I don’t know where it came from. Follow me on TikTok. You go through the trouble of looking for it yourself. Maybe I’ll repost it to here, to Twitter. Uh, I’ll, I’ll, I’ll see. But anyway, so the video that I placed on TikTok was a response to this Protestant evangel, [00:02:00] or I don’t know if he was an evangelizer or an apologist or what where I gave the biblical.

Explanation of Remembrance in Holy Communion

CA: explanation for what a remembrance is. Basically, a remembrance comes from the Old Testament. Okay, so when Jesus says the word remembrance, he means it very specifically in reference to what that word is in the biblical mind or in the scriptural mind, which is to do it as if it’s being done for the first time.

Now, every holy sacrifice of the mass is not a another sacrifice. What it is, is a re presentation of the one sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. It’s a re presentation. It’s not a representation. It is a re presentation of the sacrifice on the cross. So it is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, but it’s not a new sacrifice.

It’s a remembrance. It’s being done as if it’s being done for the first time again. Okay? That’s the basic gist [00:03:00] of it.

Discussion on TikTok Comments and Challenges

CA: Now that video has blown up on TikTok, or at least it’s blown up for me. It’s got about 2000 views. How many of those two thousands of people actually watched the whole thing? I don’t know, but 2000 views for me is a lot.

Hell 20 for me is a lot, but the thing that’s most striking is all the comments that are going on. A lot of comments from Protestants. Fine. That’s fine. I don’t, I don’t have a problem with that. Now, I wish I could, this is why I was thinking of doing a video, but I don’t know if I want to go through all that trouble.

Because it’s hard to leave, it’s hard to correct error in a 150 character comment. You’re, you’re capped at 150 characters on on TikTok, okay? It’s hard to correct an error with 150 characters. Plus, it’s annoying as hell. I don’t know if you’ve ever tried to leave comments on TikTok, like through the app.

But it’s really, really annoying. [00:04:00]

Presentation to Protestants and Catholics

CA: So anyway, this is not my defense of the real presence, what I’m doing here in Twitter Spaces or in X Spaces. This is not my defense of the real presence. This is what I want to present to Protestants and also to Catholics, you know, for your edification. That’s mainly what I’m doing right now is I’m offering this for your edification.

And also as material in case Protestants happen upon it. Because what I’m, the arguments I’m placing here are things I would put forward to a Protestant. Not to make the argument or to make the case because I’ve been doing that since I was 12 or 13. I’m over it. I am over it. I am only here for Catholics now.

I am only evangelizing for other Catholics. I have no interest in, in, in apologetics or debate with Protestants. I am over it. That’s two thirds of my life I’m not doing that. I’m not doing that anymore. But this is what I would [00:05:00] present to a Protestant. And let me give you an example of this format. I dropped another video on TikTok in response to What the hell was that now?

Oh.

Historical Context of Biblical Canon

CA: The statement that Catholics added seven books to biblical canon. You may or may not know this, but we did not add seven books. Martin Luther removed seven books. What we consider canonical scripture, the Bible, okay, was the canonical set of scriptural books that were in place in the time of Jesus and the apostles.

It’s a long story, but it is after the resurrection that the Jewish elders and rabbis Disqualified, I think, five to seven of those books. They disqualified them. They had been canonical scripture for the Jews in Jesus time, but [00:06:00] after the resurrection, they got disqualified. But the Catholics, the Christians, maintained it as canonical scripture.

So we did not add seven books. Martin Luther removed them. Okay, I did not intend to make the case. To the Protestants, but I presented this question to them in a video. Hey Protestants, I said. I made it a little bit nicer than this. I’m just speaking plainly to you now. I get that you think the Church added seven books.

Okay. Well, if that’s true, if the Catholic Church added seven books to biblical canon, that would be pretty horrifying. I agree. But let me ask you this, Protestants. How horrifying would it be If you discovered that the truth is Martin Luther deleted seven books, how horrifying would that be? Imagine that you discover the truth, that Martin Luther [00:07:00] removed, deleted, seven books from biblical canon.

That would be pretty horrifying, right? Maybe the knowledge of how horrifying that would be is why you are resistant to the truth. Because to face the truth would be so utterly horrifying to you, you might convert to Catholicism the next day. That’s essentially what I said. So I didn’t make the case for the, you know, the Sept again, the seven books.

I didn’t make the case, I just presented that question. Here as well, I’m only going to present certain things for consideration. I’m not actually going to build an argument in defense of the real presence. I’m over it. Okay, so here’s what I would basically present. And I’m going to put this In an article or blog on my website at catholicadventurer.

com I’m going to put, I’m going to format this so there’s just a blog or an article. I’m not going to, you know, do the whole, the whole argumentation thing. So the real presence.

Biblical Evidence for the Real Presence

CA: Is the Holy Eucharist really the body and blood of Jesus [00:08:00] Christ or is it just a symbol representing Jesus? Well, the first thing we have to go to is John 6, where three times Jesus said, If you do not eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life within you.

He was challenged on it. A couple of times, and he didn’t revise his statement, he repeated it three times. That, my friends, has to tell you something. Because Jesus is known for either saying, well, there is more to it, but I want you to learn it yourself. Sort of thing. Or, he might say, okay, I can see you’re not getting this, you Pharisees, for example.

I see you’re not understanding it, so let me explain. We have seen both of those things happen. But in John 6, Jesus repeats three times, If you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life within you. Three times without modification. It was so shocking to the Jews that Jesus lost many, many followers [00:09:00] that day.

It should say something that he repeated it three times and didn’t modify his statement. But here’s also, here’s another thing that often goes over people’s heads. It is biblically, or I should say, historically, for the Jews, it is significant that he said it three times. Because in Jewish oral tradition, repeating a statement three times solidifies it.

That’s, the repetition, the thrice repetition, is symbolic. It is, it alone is a statement that this is solid, this is accurate, this is the truth, you can take it to the bank. That’s what a three time repetition means in the Jewish mind in Jesus time, and that was part of Hebrew oral tradition for hundreds and hundreds of years even before Jesus, and it remained during the time of Jesus.

So what the [00:10:00] Jews in his time were hearing was not merely, he’s saying it again and again and again. What the Jews heard was, he said it three times. And to the Jewish mind, that means something completely different from what it means to us. We just hear repetition. They hear, these are my words, this is exactly what I mean, you can take it to the bank.

That’s what they heard. So I would present that for anyone’s consideration, not just Protestants, but even Catholics. Because there’s a tragedy of Catholics increasingly losing faith in the real presence of the Holy Eucharist. Well, you don’t have to believe the church if you don’t want to, my friends. You don’t even have to believe me.

But is your faith strong enough to believe what Jesus said? And I leave that to you to consider. The real presence, someone left this comment saying that the church didn’t believe in the real presence until 1215, I think he said 1200, uh, 1200 A. D. in some council, but that is [00:11:00] not true. The church has always believed in the real presence of Jesus.

The church promulgated, declared and promulgated let me just Google this real quick. What was the council in 1215? I guess that was the latter in council of 1215. That makes sense. Now, the latter in council, so the, the church always believed in the real presence, but it officially declared and promulgated in the latter, in council of 1215 AD in response to active heresies of the time.

It was in response to, and often times that is when an ecumenical council is called, or that is something done during an ecumenical council. It, it’s a response to heresy or questions of belief. So this was not a declaration of, now, as of 1215 A. D., we believe this. No. In 1215, the Church only made it official, so that there can be no arguments to the contrary.

The Church always believed in the Real Presence. How do we know? [00:12:00]

Early Church Fathers on the Real Presence

CA: Ignatius of Antioch, 110 A. D. I have no taste for corruptible food, nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God. Which is the flesh of Jesus Christ and for drink, I desire his blood which is love incorruptible. It’s Ignatius, Ignatius or Ignatius letter to the Romans in 110 A.

D. Justin Martyr, for not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these, but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God, I and had both flesh and blood for our salvation. So, too, as we have been taught Pause. Justin Martyr is saying, as we have been taught. This is not novelty.

This is sacred tradition. so, too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist, by the Eucharistic prayer The words of [00:13:00] institution come from St. Paul, by the way. by the Eucharistic prayer, Set down by him and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus.

Justin Martyr is saying that after the consecration, the bread and the wine are the flesh and the blood of that same incarnated Jesus. That was 151 A. D. We can go on down the line, Cyprian of Carthage, Origen, and so on. This was definitely Catholic belief. This was Catholic slash Christian belief in the early church.

It did not just come from out of nowhere in 1215. That is ridiculous. And I have some biblical evidence to consider. [00:14:00] This is John, this is, uh, these are a couple things, so I’m just gonna say, make it simple. This is in the book of John, John 6. I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate manna in the desert, but they died.

This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat it and not die. And then it, I’m jumping around a little bit, but it’s all from John 6. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.

Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him, 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. Now, just give me a second. I want to check something.

Let me set this up as I’m, as I’m looking for this. And this is in reference to what I just read. [00:15:00] So, the Jews are hearing what you heard. It’s shocking to the Jews that is, as it is shocking to non Catholic Christians, or non Catholics period. Okay, but they are hearing even more than what we are. Okay? Give me a second just to confirm this.

I’m gonna have to confirm this off the air, as I say. Let me just make the point, and then I’ll explain to you what I want to confirm. The Jews of the time, in Jesus time, were expecting a significant sign to accompany the return of the Messiah. That sign was a return of the manna. After the Jews, I think it was after they entered the Promised Land, or maybe it was just before, the manna, the manna that God was sending down from heaven to nourish them stopped.

I guess they didn’t need it anymore, right? But, and this is what I want to [00:16:00] confirm, I think Moses, it was either, it could have been in a rabbinical text, I kind of remember Moses foretold that with the, the coming of the Messiah there will, what will accompany the, the coming of the Messiah will be a return of the manna that definitely is in Jewish history, but now I’m not sure if it was Moses or if it was in, in rabbinical texts.

I will confirm that and I will update this. I don’t know. Wherever I’m putting this on demand. It might, it might be for locals members only. I don’t know. You can always confirm it yourself. Did that come from Moses or was that rabbinical text? Rabbinical teaching rooted in Moses in Jewish oral tradition that the return of the coming of the Messiah would be, would accompany a return of the manna.

Wherever it comes from is irrelevant. That was def, this one is fact. It was definitely in the [00:17:00] Jewish mind that the coming of the Messiah would accompany a return of the manna. A return of the manna that would be permanent, not temporary, it wouldn’t go away again. So what are the Jews hearing in John 6? I am the bread of life.

Your forefathers ate manna in the desert and died. This is the bread that gives everlasting life, I’m paraphrasing. What are they hearing? I am the bread of life. I am the manna. The manna that you were expecting with the coming of the Messiah, that’s me. I am one and the same. I am the manna and the Messiah.

So the Jews that are hearing Jesus speak in John 6 are hearing more than what we are. They’re hearing that Jesus Christ is the son of Joseph and Mary, is the manna, and the Messiah. And oh yeah, you have to eat him. You have to eat his flesh and drink his [00:18:00] blood. Side note, another shocking thing that they’re hearing is that they have to drink blood.

In the Jewish mind, that was just abominable. Which is, it’s, it’s scriptural, it comes from the Old Testament, they’re not supposed to drink blood, not a speck of it. So that’s another thing that shocks them, that’s kind of irrelevant though, I just thought you’d find that interesting. So I’m sharing it, you’re welcome very much.

Further Biblical Evidence and Conclusion

CA: Now, continuing with biblical evidence, 1 Corinthians 27, Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. My friends, if, if it’s possible to unworthily consume the Eucharist, let’s say, let’s say if, if, let’s say people believe it’s just a representation of Jesus or it’s just literally we just, it’s just something we do to remember the Last Supper, to commemorate the Crucifixion, okay, how can you possibly [00:19:00] consume bread and wine unworthily if that’s all that it is?

If it’s just crackers and grape juice, how can you possibly be unworthy to drink and eat that? Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. Let’s go to Acts, chapter 2. They devoted themselves to the teaching of the Apostles, hashtag sacred tradition, to the communal life, and to the breaking of the bread.

My brothers and sisters, there is nothing insignificant in the scripture. So if all we’re being told in Acts is that they ate together, that is a ridiculous thing to include. They devoted themselves to the teaching of the Apostles, To the communal life and to the breaking of the bread.

They didn’t just eat and sleep together. [00:20:00] The communal life is apostolic life. And it follows immediately after they say they devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles. And then what follows? The breaking of the bread. They didn’t devote themselves to the breaking of the bread because it was bread.

If it were merely symbolic, why does it recruit such devotion in the early church? If this was just bread, why does it recruit such devotion in the early church, following the teaching of the Apostles? If it’s just bread, 1 Corinthians 10, the cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ?

The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? If it’s really just crackers and grape juice, why are we talking about it in Scripture? [00:21:00] The Cup of Blessing that we bless. This is specifically a reference to the Last Supper and to the Passover. The Cup of Blessing that we bless.

I’ll take it a step further. I think it’s also a reference to the fourth cup consumed by Jesus Christ on the cross, which completed the Passover meal. After which Jesus said, it is finished. Uh, maybe I’ll talk about that on another podcast episode, I’m not gonna get into it here. The cup of blessing that we bless, we’re not just talking about a cup filled with whatever you want to put in it.

It is directly a reference to the Last Supper and to the, the Passover. Therefore to the cross, the cup of blessing, which we bless. Is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? Paul is not [00:22:00] saying, is it not a representation of the blood of Christ? Is it not an imitation of the blood of Christ? Is it not for us to remember that Jesus died?

He said none of that. Is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? And it continues. The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Again, not a representation. Not a representation.

So these are things I would present, really, to anyone who doubts that the Holy Eucharist is the real presence of Jesus Christ. I’m sorry for these pauses, my throat gets a little, I don’t know, I like to say throaty. And I have to clear my throat from time to time, sorry about that. Anyway, these are the things that I would present to anyone who doubts that the real presence Or, I’m sorry, [00:23:00] that the Holy Eucharist is the real presence of Jesus Christ.

I have laid out a rational argument. I have substantiated it with biblical evidence. I have offered further substantiation in a couple of quotes from the early church, and I can give you several more because I’ve collected these for debates in the past.

It is in the writings of the early church fathers. It is in the the Didache. Which is often attributed to the Apostles, but we don’t really know who wrote the Didache. If you, if you don’t know about the Didache, it’s like the earliest church writing immediately after, you know, the Bible, the scriptures of the Bible.

So it’s, it’s a very, very early church writing. It goes back so far, we’re not even sure who wrote it. That’s how old it is. And it’s a really fascinating read. It [00:24:00] almost looks like a continuation It’s a really fascinating read. Anyway, we see references to this, very direct, in the Didache. We see it in the writings of the early Church Fathers.

So we know this didn’t pop up in, you know, 12, 15 AD. If it’s really just bread, it’s so weird. That the Holy Spirit is talking about it the way it is spoken of in the scriptures, that is awfully strange. First of all, it’s strange that it comes up again and again and again and again. What’d I do? One, two, three, four, and I think really there are two others that I could have included.

But I’ve, I’ve given four scripture references. In the New Testament. It’s awfully strange that if it’s just bread, this keeps popping up. That’s very, very strange. And the way it pops up, the way it’s spoken about, the way it is being treated, [00:25:00] is awfully strange if it’s just crackers and grape juice, my friends.

So what should a non believer, whether it’s a, a, a Protestant who doesn’t believe in the Eucharist, or a Catholic who doesn’t believe in the Eucharist, what should a non believer take from this? You can take whatever you like from it, but here’s what I ask you to do. Consider every syllable that you just listened to in this Spaces Session slash On Demand podcast.

Consider every syllable, because all of this, if you are, if you’re an honest thinker, all of this is very substantial evidence to the Catholic claim. It is very substantial, and if you are a non believer in the Eucharist, Every piece of this argument should be very troubling to you. I mean in a positive way, because it should shake you, and dislodge you from error, and bring you much closer to [00:26:00] the truth, which is the Catholic claim that the Holy Eucharist is the Body and Blood.

Of jesus christ. It’s not a representation. It’s not make believe

press rewind If I haven’t blown your mind and listen to this whole argument all over again, and then do your own research and for pete’s sake Don’t if you’re a protestant, please don’t research protestant pastors. I understand as a researcher That might be a, a, a good place to start because you figure someone has already done this research.

Let me start there. Please don’t do that. Because if I want to research something in the Catholic claim, sometimes I do start with Catholic theologians, and oftentimes I won’t. Sometimes I choose to start, I mean, I don’t anymore, but this is when I was still doing these, you know, this research over time, you know, learning and researching.

Sometimes I didn’t start with, with Catholic resources. Sometimes it started with secular resources, whether it was [00:27:00] sociology, medicine, slash science sometimes it was history. Sometimes you have to break free of any risk of bias and ask yourself, do you trust the Bible? You better look at those scripture references I just gave you.

Do you trust the writings of the early church? I, I quoted early church fathers that you Protestants, you Agree, we’re valid Christians, and there are many, many more. And then, forget it. You have to ask yourself, well, these men are directly in the Apostolic lineage. The Apostolic Fathers were trained by the Apostles.

The direct descendants of the Apostolic Fathers were trained by men who were trained by the Apostles. This is really, really close proximity to Jesus. What did [00:28:00] they believe? What did they profess to be authentic Christian faith? My Protestant brothers and sisters, you are going to be very disturbed by what you find.

I’m, I’m, and I’m not telling this to scare you. I’m telling you this so that when you encounter it, you can say well, that nutjob did say this was going to be troubling for me. So let me not get too upset about it and let me continue further. What was the authentic Christian belief? Regarding the Eucharist, well, go directly as far back to the early church as you can go.

The early church fathers, because they are in the closest proximity to Jesus and the Apostles, and discover what they believed. And I’m going to tell you again, you are going to find references, sources, and sources, and quotes, and quotes, and quotes, and quotes, and quotes, that demonstrate unambiguously that demonstrate unambiguously That what the [00:29:00] Catholic Church currently teaches about the Holy Eucharist being the real presence of Jesus Christ being the true body and blood of Jesus Christ.

You’re going to find that that teaching existed in at least as far back as 110 A. D. And I can tell you it goes back even further than that. But 110 A. D. is very close proximity. To even to, to, to some of the scriptures in the, of the Bible.

Hello to James who just joined me in this Twitter space. Thank you for joining me, brother. I’m very happy that you are. I’m sorry to tell you this space is coming to an end. It’s coming to an end. So you’re just catching the end of it. I’m so sorry, brother. But thank you so much for, for popping in. I hope you take the time to catch it.

On demand.

Final Thoughts and Closing Remarks

CA: And I want to close by saying this, and I want, I want Protestants to really hear this, okay? I have no animosity toward non Catholic Christians. Zero. No animosity at [00:30:00] all. I know I might sound a little irritated in this, but I’m really not. I’m just kind of giving emphasis, I guess. I don’t know. I have no animosity toward non Catholic Christians.

Once upon a time I did, I was always battling Protestants. Always, always, always. But, and that, I mean, that was some time ago, but these days, especially, here, this is my, my, my, my thinking, and this comes from my heart, truly. The world is very dark, and things are very troubling out there, right? And it gives me peace and brings me joy to encounter another Christian, whether they are Catholic or not, and I mean a real Christian.

I’m not talking about, God forgive me, and I’m sorry. To anyone out there who this offends, I’m not talking about Jehovah’s Witnesses and I am not talking about Mormons. I am sorry. I’m sorry. I just can’t get on board that train. I’m talking about [00:31:00] genuine Christians who believe in the Trinity, who profess that Jesus Christ is Lord, and so on.

When I encounter such people, I am very happy to encounter those people. When I encounter mainline Protestants, or other Catholics, when I encounter people who believe in the Gospel, who profess that Jesus Christ is Lord, who believe in the Trinity, man, you are alright with me. I don’t care if you’re a Methodist, or a Lutheran, I don’t care.

I mean, I want you to become Catholic, but, you know, and I’ll do what I can, you know, if you have questions, I’ll answer them. I want you to be Catholic, but, I’m gonna love you anyway as, as a non Catholic Christian. I have zero animosity toward, toward Protestants, none. None. I want you to be Catholic, but okay.

In, in God’s time, maybe that’ll happen. But as it is now, I try to focus on what we have in common. And what we have, what, what, where we differ. I will [00:32:00] be vocal about our difference. I’m not gonna pretend it doesn’t exist. Yeah, you know, isn’t it funny that Jesus Christ had brothers? Well, I’m not just gonna shut my mouth to that.

I’m sorry, brother. He didn’t have brothers. Let me explain to you what the scripture means when, when he, when the scripture said, talks about the brother of Jesus. I’m not gonna shut my mouth about our differences, but I’m going to focus on what we have in common, and we have a lot in common.

A great deal of what Catholics believe, Protestants believe, and there are some things that Catholics believe the Protestants don’t. Okay, I’m not gonna shut my mouth about it, but I’m not going to make a crusade about it either, and I’m going to choose to focus on what we have in common. No animosity toward Protestants.

And this comes from my heart. None. Zero. Zero. [00:33:00] There are Protestants that I follow. A couple of Protestants follow me on social media. And there are some who are just fantastic, they’re just really, really great. And then there are some who say the occasional silly thing and I always razz them. Sometimes I razz them a little bit and sometimes I just leave it alone, you know.

No animosity toward Protestants. You are my brothers and my sisters. I consider you wayward brothers and sisters and maybe you consider me a wayward brother or sis I was gonna say a wayward brother or sister. Maybe you consider me a wayward brother. Okay, fine. Haha. But you’re still my brothers and sisters, and that is how I see you.

That is how I see you. And I love you, and I care about you. I want you to become Catholic, but that is not my mission anymore. To evangelize the Protestants. [00:34:00] To debate Protestants. To bring Protestants into the fold. I did that for a very long time. That is not my mission anymore. My mission now. I feel, I believe, with my whole heart, my mission now is to be with my brother and sister Catholics and to help make them better.

To protect them, to teach them, to teach them what I can offer. You know, I’m not like the great teacher. To teach them what I can offer based on my knowledge and experience. To help push them closer to sainthood. To help them to finish the race. To help them to fight the good fight and to finish strong.

Amen. That’s my mission now,

not to fight with the Protestants, but to tend to and care for my brothers and sisters in the Catholic Church. Unless you are Mormon, then I will bite your head off.[00:35:00]

I’m just kidding about the bite your head off thing. Take it easy, Mormons. Go have a cup of coffee. Oh, you can’t. Sorry. Go have a drink. Oh, you can’t. Sorry. I’m sorry. Mormon, seriously, you’re created by God, you’re made in God’s image and likeness, and I love you. But I gotta tell you, space aliens are not gods.

They’re not religions. Why do you guys believe in space aliens being deities? Come on! Alright, this has been a special Twitter space, or a special episode of the Catholic Experience. If you’re catching this on demand, um, I have been the Catholic adventurer. Check me out at catholicadventurer. com. There are links to my podcast and everything in my bio.

Sign up for my newsfeed, my newsletter, notes from the field. [00:36:00] Oh, I wish some Catholics had popped into this space, but That’s just how it is, man. I, it doesn’t, doesn’t matter what I’m doing. I could be doing, giving the secrets of the universe, saying, hop in on this space, it’s the secrets of the universe.

Don’t nobody show up. That’s all right. Ha ha ha. Whatever God wills. Whatever God wills is always the best. I’m with it, Lord. I’m with it. I’m with it. I’m not complaining. I love you, God. I love you, Father. You’re good to me. You’re very good to me. You’re better to me than I deserve, truly. Sign it out of here.

May God be with you all. Bye bye.