If I need Rome's Eucharist to truly have fellowship with the Christ, why can't I take it, again? Because I'm in a false church, is that not so?
Many churches refer to the Eucharist as "communion", and that word means and implies "community". When groups split from the Church, they no longer were or are in "communion" with it.
The real problem, Rome has a different gospel than the Bible. You've forgotten the last time I read through the Sermon on the Mount was at Mount of the Beatitudes (Catholic!) Church in The Galil, the difference is I see the Sermon as a proof that people don't keep the Law and need Christ's atonement, you read it as a checklist to get into Heaven, which means--you don't need Christ at all to get into Heaven. Can you explain THAT for me?
False. The Church teaches that belief in God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit is #1, which is why
all our prayers,
including the Eucharistic prayers, are to God.
Secondly, the Gospel is what the Church has always taught as being important, and it is an
undivided gospel. IOW, to say or imply that part if it is unimportant or of lesser importance is in violation of what Jesus taught and what the Church teaches. It is you, not I, that wants to ignore what Jesus mandated for us in the Sermon and elsewhere, thus trivializing the Gospel. IOW, it's essentially a "package deal" that indicates if one truly believes
in Jesus and not just a couple of things about him.
And for you to say that the Church teaches that we "don't need Christ at all to get into Heaven" is categorically false, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church says as such. Maybe look things up instead of relying on falsehoods-- google can be a good friend if one uses it.
So, why do you persist in posting falsehoods while claiming to be a believer in Jesus? Why do you keep inventing this garbage, like above? Is this what your church is telling you is moral under Jesus' teachings? If so, then let me suggest you leave it and find a church that teaches the
full Gospel-- not just a fraction of it.