CathInfo.com

Absolutely delusional, based on the rubbish you promote I would say you have helped save no one, and infact only increasing their sins. The Dimonds on the other hand actually make high quality videos about over coming sin, so not only doctrine but also morals.

Yes, it's borderline nuts.  As I said, some kind of megalomania with delusions of grandeur.  He literally fantasizes about converting billions and becoming the greatest saint in all of history.  There's a fine line between the saints' desire to be saints and hubris.  That's where the saints go through a dark night of the soul where they switch over from wanting to love God to wanting God to be loved.  There's a huge difference between the two, just as there's a huge difference in wanting to become a saint merely so that God is less offended and more pleased by you, and wanting to become a saint for your own glory.  St. Paul, a true saint, gloried only in his infirmities.  Saints realizes their nothingness, and all consider themselves to be the worst of sinners.  People often wonder if it isn't false humility for the saint to consider themselves the worst sinners.  Not at all.  Saints recognize that they are literally nothing but evil, as Our Lord said ... "you who are evil".  If there's anything good in them, it's only God ... whereas their own contribution is the opposite.  Saints become saints mostly by taking themselves out of the picture, where they get out of God's way.  Saints also recognize, in looking upon some great sinners, that ... if they had been born into the same situaiton as those sinners, with the same genes, into the same family, had the same upbringing, had the same experiences, etc. ... would they have ended up any better, and realize that they would not.  They do not know what graces others have received, but do know the torrents of grace they themselves have received and realized that had they cooperated with all fo them, they should be much farther along on the way to sanctity.

I have been studying English for a long time, but this it the first time that I see a person trying to write 17th century English.

Isn't it against the rules to create another account after your original has been banned?

I am sure that there are CRORES of people rooting for Xavier to be banned again. His Novus Ordo grandiose delusion is quite irritating.

Despite various false allegations, there have been only two or three times that I had requested the banning of a user, and it's typically for things like slander (e.g. Cabbage).  I do not consider it appropriate just for disagreements.  I have not requested the banning of Xavier for his obnoxious views, but at some point this nonsense that both he and Croix engage in where they keep coming back over and over again after multipel bans, it really has to stop.  Even there, I have not made any request to Matthew to have him banned.  Had they e-mailed Matthew and asked him to come back on the forum and he agreed, then that would be no issue.  I make an analogy between legal and illegal immigration.  But with some posters, there does come a time where they're making no positive contribution to the forum, and simply annoy and irritate people because THEY ARE NOT ACTUAL TRADITIONAL CATHOLICS.  As Matthew has said, when you see an overwhelmingly negative up-vote to down-vote ratio, that generally means that you don't really "fit" here, and people who don't fit just cause much wasted time and irritation.  I mean, how much longer do we have to watch someone here shilling in favor of the New Mass.  Such an individual is NOT a Traditional Catholic.  Now, one could argue that it's not INTRINSICALLY evil, but bad in other ways, etc. ... but this guy carries water for the Modernist papal claimants, and considers Traditional Catholics to be schismatics, since there's no legitimate reason not to be in submission to them, since they do not teach heresy or error, nor is their Mass offensive to God, i.e. there's no sufficient reason to disobey.  Xavier Nishant is here on his "mission from God" to convert us schismatic Trads, which for all intents and purposes means he's trolling here, i.e. isn't here in good faith.

Just 5 Sample Proofs because all 25 are too long:

25 Proofs of the Truth of Real Presence from the Early Church
8 May 2024|0.1 Glory of Christendom, 0.4 Precious Blood of Jesus, 0.5 Holy Eucharist's Necessity

[Editor's Note: dear friends, this article is for Prots, Lutherans, Calvinists, Anglicans, Baptists etc, to examine and see the Patristic and Scriptural Teaching of Transubstantiation].
It was the madness of the heretic Martin Luther to declare a novelty unknown to 15 Christian Centuries. That, in spite of Mal 1:11 - which clearly teaches the Sacrifice of the Mass - a passage we will see below to be extensively quoted by the Apostles and the Fathers to prove the Christian Priesthood and the Christian Sacrifice of the Mass, it was allegedly a "blasphemy" to say the Mass was a Sacrifice. Many of Luther's wandering spiritual children, taking his heresies to their logical conclusion, ended up denying the Real Presence altogether, though Luther himself did not.
Next, Luther admits he got this false doctrine from the devil himself: " From the days of the apostles until the present time the holy sacrifice of the Mass has had no more vehement opponent than the unhappy Martin Luther, who not only attacked but decried this divine mystery. He did not do this of himself, nor when he first apostatized, but at a later period, and at the instigation of the devil. In fact the deluded man himself acknowledges in his writings that his teaching comes from the devil, and only at the suggestion of the evil one has he abolished the Mass as an act of idolatry, although he must have known full well that the devil is the hater of all that is good, and teaches mankind naught but what is evil. Besides, Luther might have considered that if the Mass were idolatrous the devil would not oppose it, much less desire that it should be done away with; on the contrary, he would promote it and praise it, because the more Masses were said the more acts of idolatry would be committed, and greater dishonor done to the most high God.
 In this wise Satan has deprived not the Lutherans only, but all the Protestant sects that have arisen after him, of the salutary sacrifice of the holy Mass, and thereby done them an irreparable injury." This is reminiscent of 1 Sam 2:17: " This sin of the young men was very great in the LORD’s sight, for they were treating the LORD’s offering with contempt." The Sin of Luther and Calvin was very great before the Lord.
Luther's Rebellion against the Pope and Christian Priesthood also calls to mind - and is thus pre-emptively condemned as worthy of hell by God in the Bible - the Rebellion of Korah against the High Priest Moses and the Old Testament Priesthood.
" Woe to them! For they have gone in the way of Cain, have run greedily in the error of Balaam for profit, and perished in the rebellion of Korah." (Jude 1:11). This statement of Saint Jude the Apostle shows a New Covenant Ministerial Priesthood exists against which it is possible to rebel and perish in rebelling, as happened to Korah in OT times. And for those not familiar with the example of Korah, here it is in Numbers 16: " 3Holding an assembly against Moses and Aaron, they said,a “You go too far! The whole community, all of them, are holy; the LORD is in their midst. Why then should you set yourselves over the LORD’s assembly?”  ... Moses also said to Korah, “Hear, now, you Levites! ...  It is therefore against the LORD that you and all your faction are conspiring. As for Aaron, what has he done that you should grumble against him?” ...  No sooner had he finished saying all this than the ground beneath them split open, 32and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them and their families and all of Korah’s people* with all their possessions. They went down alive to Sheol with all belonging to them; the earth closed over them, and they disappeared from the assembly."(Numbers 16:3-33). May God have Mercy on us all.
1. The Didache of the 12 Apostles (c. 70 A.D.)
Astonishingly, we have a nearly infallible proof of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass right from the Apostolic Age itself, and that from the Tradition of the 12 Apostles, Didache.
"But concerning the Eucharist, after this fashion give ye thanks.
First, concerning the cup ...
And concerning the broken bread ...
And let none eat or drink of your Eucharist but such as have been baptized into the name of the Lord, for of a truth the Lord hath said concerning this, Give not that which is holy unto dogs. (Mat 7:6)
On the Lord's Day of the Lord gather together, break bread and give thanks, after confessing your transgressions SO THAT YOUR SACRIFICE MAY BE PURE. Let no one who has a quarrel with his neighbor join you until he is reconciled by the Lord: "In every place and time let there be OFFERED TO ME A CLEAN SACRIFICE. For I am  Great King," says the Lord, "and My name is wonderful among the Gentiles." (Mal 1:14)"
2. St. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 A.D.)
St. Ignatius of Antioch, a disciple of St. John the Apostle, who in his letters also proves the importance and necessity of submitting to and remaining in communion with and subject to Bishops, and the Church of Rome which presides, (neither of which Calvin and Luther did), teaches the Dogma of the Real Presence as clearly as words can make it. He shows the same Saint John the Apostle, who records Our Lord Jesus Christ as teaching Transubstantiation in John 6, also handed down by Oral Tradition that the Holy Eucharist is the True Flesh and Blood of Jesus Christ.
"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, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I DESIRE HIS BLOOD, which is love incorruptible. (Letter to the Romans 7:3)
Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: FOR THERE IS ONE FLESH OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, and one cup IN THE UNION OF HIS BLOOD; one ALTAR, as there is one bishop with the presbytery… (Letter to the  Philadelphians 4:1)
They [i.e. the Gnostics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that THE EUCHARIST IS THE FLESH OF OUR SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. (Letter to Smyrnians 7:1)
3. St. Justin the Martyr (c. 100 - 165 A.D.)
St. Justin the Martyr, a Great Early Christian Apologist, to Jews and other unbelievers, repeatedly and clearly proves the Divine Eucharistic Sacrifice, including from the Prophet Malachi:
"We call this food Eucharist; and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [Baptism], and is thereby living as Christ has enjoined.
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 and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, AND BY THE CHANGE OF WHICH our blood and flesh is nourished, IS BOTH THE FLESH AND THE BLOOD OF THAT INCARNATED JESUS. (First Apology, 66)
Moreover, as I said before, concerning the sacrifices which you at that time offered, God speaks through Malachi [1:10-12]…It is of the SACRIFICES OFFERED TO HIM IN EVERY PLACE BY US, the Gentiles, that is, OF THE BREAD OF THE EUCHARIST AND LIKEWISE OF THE CUP OF THE EUCHARIST, that He speaks at that time; and He says that we glorify His name, while you profane it. (Dialogue with Trypho, 41)
4. St. Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 140 - 202 A.D.)
…He took from among creation that which is bread, and gave thanks, saying, "THIS IS MY BODY." The cup likewise, which is from among the creation to which we belong, HE CONFESSED TO BE HIS BLOOD.
He taught THE NEW SACRIFICE OF THE NEW COVENANT, of which Malachi, one of the twelve prophets, had signified beforehand: [quotes Mal 1:10-11]. By these words He makes it plain that the former people will cease to make offerings to God; BUT THAT IN EVERY PLACE SACRIFICE WILL BE OFFERED TO HIM, and indeed, a pure one; for His name is glorified among the Gentiles. (Against Heresies 4:17:5)
But what consistency is there in those who hold that the bread over which thanks have been given IS THE BODY OF THEIR LORD, and the cup HIS BLOOD, if they do not acknowledge that He is the Son of the Creator… How can they say that the flesh which has been nourished BY THE BODY OF THE LORD AND BY HIS BLOOD gives way to corruption and does not partake of life? …For as the bread from the earth, receiving the invocation of God, IS NO LONGER COMMON BREAD BUT THE EUCHARIST, consisting of two elements, earthly and heavenly… (Against Heresies 4:18:4-5)
If the BODY be not saved, then, in fact, neither did the Lord redeem us with His BLOOD; and neither is the cup of the EUCHARIST THE PARTAKING OF HIS BLOOD nor is the bread which we break THE PARTAKING OF HIS BODY…He has declared the cup, a part of creation, TO BE HIS OWN BLOOD, from which He causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, HE HAS ESTABLISHED AS HIS OWN BODY, from which He gives increase to our bodies.
When, therefore, the mixed cup and the baked bread receives the Word of God and BECOMES THE EUCHARIST, THE BODY OF CHRIST, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, WHICH IS ETERNAL LIFE -- flesh which is nourished BY THE BODY AND BLOOD OF THE LORD…receiving the Word of God, BECOMES THE EUCHARIST, WHICH IS THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST… (Against Heresies 5:2:2-3)
5. Tertullian (c. 155 - 250 A.D.)
Likewise, in regard to days of fast, many do not think they should be present at the SACRIFICIAL prayers, because their fast would be broken if they were to receive THE BODY OF THE LORD…THE BODY OF THE LORD HAVING BEEN RECEIVED AND RESERVED, each point is secured: both the participation IN THE SACRIFICE… (Prayer 19:1)
The flesh feeds on THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST, so that the SOUL TOO may fatten on God. (Resurrection of the Dead 8:3)
The Sacrament of the Eucharist, which the Lord commanded to be taken at meal times and by all, we take even before daybreak in congregations… WE OFFER SACRIFICES FOR THE DEAD on their birthday anniversaries…. We take anxious care lest something of our Cup or Bread should fall upon the ground… (The Crown 3:3-4)
A woman, after the death of her husband, is bound not less firmly but even more so, not to marry another husband…Indeed, she prays for his soul and asks that he may, while waiting, find rest; and that he may share in the first resurrection. And each year, on the anniversary of his death, SHE OFFERS THE SACRIFICE. (Monogamy 10:1,4)