Cannibals for Christ wrote:
> Since communion is a form of cannibalism, I think this would violate
> the ethics of veganism.

See if you can find an .mp3 download of Phil Hendrie's
classic bit, "All-You-Can-Eat Negro". It's about a
confused old black lady whose nephew has died. Someone
has arranged a Catholic funeral mass for the nephew,
and because of the communion ceremony, the confused old
lady thinks "...them Catholics macked on my boy."

In the routine, a real Catholic priest calls the
program and attempts to explain to the old lady that
the bread and wine become the body and blood of Jesus
Christ. To this, the old lady answers: "Oh my god...I
wanna...I wanna vomit..."

It's hilarious.

You can find it (probably) using Kazaa, but if you want
to be legal about it, try to buy a copy of his 1997
"Best of Phil Hendrie" CD, subtitled "Still On The
Air". Or, you can pay to listen to it at
http://www.philhendrieshow.com/audio_mavis.html

You can listen to the "All You Can Eat Negro" clip at
http://www.thingsbahamian.net/philhendrie.htm. It's
the 8th one down the column on the right.


Jonathan Ball wrote:

> Cannibals for Christ wrote:
>
>> Since communion is a form of cannibalism, I think this would violate
>> the ethics of veganism.
>
>
> See if you can find an .mp3 download of Phil Hendrie's classic bit,
> "All-You-Can-Eat Negro". It's about a confused old black lady whose
> nephew has died. Someone has arranged a Catholic funeral mass for the
> nephew, and because of the communion ceremony, the confused old lady
> thinks "...them Catholics macked on my boy."
>
> In the routine, a real Catholic priest calls the program and attempts to
> explain to the old lady that the bread and wine become the body and
> blood of Jesus Christ. To this, the old lady answers: "Oh my god...I
> wanna...I wanna vomit..."
>
> It's hilarious.
>
> You can find it (probably) using Kazaa, but if you want to be legal
> about it, try to buy a copy of his 1997 "Best of Phil Hendrie" CD,
> subtitled "Still On The Air". Or, you can pay to listen to it at
> http://www.philhendrieshow.com/audio_mavis.html
>

Vera Six wrote:

> Please stop cross-posting.

Stop dictating to people.

Please stop cross-posting.

Thanks in advance.

V.S.

"Beowulf" >

Oh....gee, did I cross-post?

Sorry.

Didnt care.

Mainly cuz you crossposted to tell us not to crosspost. Kinna hypocritical
and all controlly, huh? Now, some people will prolly crosspost just to tink
your winkie.

Some people are mean like that.

Mostly cuz its funny to watch your face get all red. Not that Id do that or
anything. But I would laugh if it happened.

___
/uesday
/<night





On 12/4/03 2:15 PM, Vera Six at wrote:

> Would you please stop cross-posting?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> V.S.
>
>
> "Tuesday Knight" >
>
>

"Tuesday Knight" > wrote in message
.. .
> Oh....gee, did I cross-post?
>
> Sorry.
>
> Didnt care.
>
> Mainly cuz you crossposted to tell us not to crosspost. Kinna
hypocritical
> and all controlly, huh? Now, some people will prolly crosspost just to
tink
> your winkie.
>
> Some people are mean like that.
>
> Mostly cuz its funny to watch your face get all red. Not that Id do
that or
> anything. But I would laugh if it happened.

____
__( )__
(o) ,, (o)
o======Oo
hehehee... yeah.. I'd laff too...
P

___
> /uesday
> /<night
>
>
>
>
>
> On 12/4/03 2:15 PM, Vera Six at wrote:
>
> > Would you please stop cross-posting?
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> > V.S.
> >
> >
> > "Tuesday Knight" >
> >
> >
>

You're welcome.

"Vera Six" > wrote in message
...
> Please stop cross-posting.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> V.S.
>
>
> "johac" >
>
>

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 21:01:06 +0100, "Vera Six"
> ejaculated:
<top posting fixed>
>"Beowulf" >
>> <snip>
>Please stop cross-posting.
>
>Thanks in advance.

Please go **** yourself.

Thanks in advance.

--
Jesus is my crush.

On 12/5/03 1:26 PM, Beowulf at wrote:

> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 21:01:06 +0100, "Vera Six"
> > ejaculated:
> <top posting fixed>
>> "Beowulf" >
>>> <snip>
>> Please stop cross-posting.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>
> Please go **** yourself.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> --
> Jesus is my crush.


I think Im in love.......... :-)
___
/uesday
/<night

Vocabulary is built one symbol at a time. Soon she's gonna find the
ones that represent sound.

Zsarnok

Tuesday Knight wrote:

> Isnt that cute? She tries so hard to make words.... dontcha just love
> her????
> ___
> /uesday
> /<night
>
>
> On 12/3/03 3:13 AM, Misty at wrote:
>
>
>>,
>>
>>Tuesday Knight wrote:
>>
>>>TeeHee!
>>>___
>>>/uesday
>>>/<night ...it is a gift.
>>>
>>>
>>>On 12/2/03 2:50 PM, Hecate100 at wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Tuesday Knight" > wrote in message
om...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Um Frodo... Eyes up HERE....
>>>>
>>>>*applause*
>>>>
>>>>Love & Laughter,
>>>>Nightshade
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:45:47 -0500, Beowulf
> wrote:


>What I really don't get about Catholics

For someone with an epic name Beowulf, you sure know dick about what
you're talking about. Why don't you find out what Catholics believe
(I'll give you a hint, it's called transubstantiation) and then you
won't ask such ignorant questions.

>is that the wafer is still
>obviously a cracker and that the wine is still a Merlot or Chianti or
>whatever. Crackers taste nothing like meat and wine tastes nothing
>like blood.
>
>I suppose they could always argue that god flesh tastes like a cracker
>and god blood tastes like wine, but even they have to see that this is
>an obvious begging of the question.

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 17:56:51 -0600, "zayton" >
wrote:


>Actually, as I understand it; they devide the character of the elements into
>"accidents" and "essence". "accidence includes all physical characteristics,
>"essince" is a deeper reality, preceivable only by faith. They insist that
>this is not the same thing at all as the elements being only symbols of
>flesh and blood.
>
>Joe


ALMOST Joe, and I appreciate you attempting to understand instead of
shooting of your cake hole like some of the dingles on this thread.

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:10:01 -0800, johac >
wrote:

>It's magic!
>
>Your description is pretty much what the Catholic nuns taught me in
>school many, many years ago. It sounded silly to me back then too, but
>I knew better than to say anything at the time.

Oh great, another "I used to be Catholic" who doesn't quite remember
what Catholics believe but knows they're wrong.

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:10:01 -0800, johac >
wrote:

>I knew better than to say anything at the time.

Too bad you didn't know better now!

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 14:29:06 -0500, Beowulf
> wrote:


>How does that differ at all from consubstantiation? Which is a
>heresy, accourding to the Catholic Encyclopedia:
>
>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04322a.htm

I'll bet that Catholic Encyclopedia has an entry for
Transubstantiation too!

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 22:51:04 -0600, Spammers Blow >
ejaculated:

>On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 14:29:06 -0500, Beowulf
> wrote:
>
>
>>How does that differ at all from consubstantiation? Which is a
>>heresy, accourding to the Catholic Encyclopedia:
>>
>>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04322a.htm
>
>I'll bet that Catholic Encyclopedia has an entry for
>Transubstantiation too!

In fact, they do, and I've read it. Have you? The reason for my
question was because Zayton's statement:

>Actually, as I understand it; they devide the character of the elements into
>"accidents" and "essence". "accidence includes all physical characteristics,
>"essince" is a deeper reality, preceivable only by faith. They insist that
>this is not the same thing at all as the elements being only symbols of
>flesh and blood.

doesn't jive with the description of doctrine of transubstantiation,
which has the elements being actually transformed to flesh and blood.

--
<http://www20.brinkster.com/beowulf9/gottod/Jesus%20Hates%20The%20Little%20Children.html>

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 22:45:38 -0600, Spammers Blow >
ejaculated:

>
>
>On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:45:47 -0500, Beowulf
> wrote:
>
>
>>What I really don't get about Catholics
>
>For someone with an epic name Beowulf, you sure know dick about what
>you're talking about. Why don't you find out what Catholics believe
>(I'll give you a hint, it's called transubstantiation) and then you
>won't ask such ignorant questions.

Hey, asshole. I do know what Catholics believe. If you'd care to
read your own statements of theology (such as outlined at the Catholic
Encyclopedia), you'd know that transubstantiation entails the physical
changing of the elements into flesh and blood. In other words, it
isn't metaphorical.

For trying to paint yourself as a religious scholar you've seemed to
have forgotten that one of the key points of contention between the
Protestants and the Catholics (starting in the Reformation and through
the present day) is about transubstantiation. The Protestants almost
unanimously see it as metaphorical in one way or another and the
Catholics do not.

--
<http://www20.brinkster.com/beowulf9/gottod/Jesus%20Hates%20The%20Little%20Children.html>

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 10:01:11 -0500, Beowulf
> wrote:

>On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 22:51:04 -0600, Spammers Blow >
>ejaculated:
>
>>On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 14:29:06 -0500, Beowulf
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>How does that differ at all from consubstantiation? Which is a
>>>heresy, accourding to the Catholic Encyclopedia:
>>>
>>>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04322a.htm
>>
>>I'll bet that Catholic Encyclopedia has an entry for
>>Transubstantiation too!
>
>In fact, they do, and I've read it. Have you? The reason for my
>question was because Zayton's statement:
>
>>Actually, as I understand it; they devide the character of the elements into
>>"accidents" and "essence". "accidence includes all physical characteristics,
>>"essince" is a deeper reality, preceivable only by faith. They insist that
>>this is not the same thing at all as the elements being only symbols of
>>flesh and blood.
>
>doesn't jive with the description of doctrine of transubstantiation,
>which has the elements being actually transformed to flesh and blood

Are you sure you read it? Because IF you HAD or IF you remembered
anything about it from your days of Catholic grade school you'd know
that Catholics do not believe the "elements" transform. We believe
the substance (thus transSUBSTANTiation) or 'essence' becomes the Body
and Blood of Christ while the form, the 'accidents' remain unchanged.

Thus my initial comment to your obviously ignorant statement about the
'cracker' (which it is) tasting like flesh.

>Hey, asshole.

Ok.


>I do know what Catholics believe.

When will you show us this cuz you haven't yet.

> If you'd care to
>read your own statements of theology (such as outlined at the Catholic
>Encyclopedia), you'd know that transubstantiation entails the physical
>changing of the elements into flesh and blood.

Guess again dumbass. I thought you said you read that entry?

> In other words, it
>isn't metaphorical.

OK, you got one right.

>
>For trying to paint yourself as a religious scholar you've seemed to
>have forgotten that one of the key points of contention between the
>Protestants and the Catholics (starting in the Reformation and through
>the present day) is about transubstantiation. The Protestants almost
>unanimously see it as metaphorical in one way or another and the
>Catholics do not.

What? How have I forgotten that? Maybe once you understand what
Catholics TRULY believe, maybe you can make a statement about what I
may or may not have forgotten.