Are those who do not receive Jesus in Holy Eucharist really Christians? Is it insanity for them to continue claiming to be Christians?

  • Thread starter Thread starter StMarina303ad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
reteeks21 said:
That is erroneous statement. It is too broad and inclusive. It throws us all in there. I have never heard anything like that taught in any protestant church. Sure, there are some protestants who act like that, but I have heard, personally, some catholics say that they didn’t need to read their Bibles, or that all they had to do was go to confession after they did whatever they wanted to do. Now, I am certainly not lumping all catholics into that category. That, too, would be erroneous. To be honest, I think the very small percentage of prots and caths who do act like that are the reason why so many folks have incorrect perceptions about each other.
Click to expand...
If you re-read my post it said CAN live like that. I did not say LIVES like that. The point I am trying to make is that our beliefs drive our actions.

And it is true, Catholics do not need to **read **the Bible. If you are a Church going Catholic and you pay attention at Mass, you will get great dollops of Scripture and more besides.

Example: Weekday Mass: Reading from Epistles or OT, Psalms then Gospel.

Sunday mass: Reading from OT, Psalms, then Epistles then Gospel. And if you are lucky, you might even get a very good explanation of this in the homily so you are not left to figure out what the passage means.

If you are a daily communicant, you will have heard the Bible proclaimed in 3 years. And that is how people used to be Evangelized before te advent of the printing press.

At Mass, most parishes also give out the Mass guide with the readings included. It is actually discourteous to read it, when it is already being proclaimed. One is supposed to listen to it proclaimed.

However, while we do not need to read the Bible it is very much encouraged to read it because not everyone is a daily church goer and some Mass readers are not all that great at enunciation.

As for confession, absolution has been withheld when a priest is absolutely certain that the so called penitent is not really sorry and fully intends to commit the sin again. But that I believe is rare.
 
sandusky said:
What you said makes no sense, but is a tiptoe around what I said.

The CC has become inconsistent, incoherent, and seeker-friendly in her doctrines concerning non-catholics; in fact, I believe VII was the genesis of the seeker-friendly church movement.
Go infallible magisterium! 👍
Click to expand...
And why are you complaining? At least that’s better than tying you unto a stake.
 
sandusky said:
What you said makes no sense, but is a tiptoe around what I said.

The CC has become inconsistent, incoherent, and seeker-friendly in her doctrines concerning non-catholics; in fact, I believe VII was the genesis of the seeker-friendly church movement.
Go infallible magisterium! 👍
Click to expand...
Look at John 3. Jesus said that you must be born again or water and the Spirit. That is baptism.

Look at John 6. He never says that you must eat his flesh and drink his blood or you cannot be saved. If the Church did not accept this as fact, why would the requirement for receiving Communion be only once a year? Because we understand fully that Baptism is what makes us Christians and the Eucharist is what supports us on our journey.

It is not inconsistent. It flows naturally from Jesus’s teachings. Besides, we did not choose for you guys to leave. The fact that we leave the lights on for you should be appriciated.
 
benedictus2 said:
I applauded your reply and I don’t take that back but here’s a correction.

Christ does say you will have eternal life verses 51, 54 and 58 infact.

However, the gaining of eternal life is not limited to this. He promises eternal life to those who eat but He does not say those who don’t are damned.
Click to expand...
He says of those who don’t eat His flesh, and drink His blood, that they have no life in them.

The CC is inconsistent in this, and should be proclaiming to all who don’t imbibe of the eucharist in the manner in which she describes, that they do not have eternal life.

ISTM that Extra Eccelsiam nulla salus has quietly been put to death by the CC.

Wonder what’s next for the CC on the smorgasbord list of what is no longer to be believed?
40.png
benedictus2:
I am beginning to become convinced that Jesus is showing as many paths as possible to follow Him. It’s just that in the Catholic faith, it seems all these paths have been opened up for us to follow, not just one.
Click to expand...
Yes, God is on the top of the mountain, and there are many paths to him, grasshopper.

Seeker-friendly. :hmmm:
 
sandusky said:
He says of those who don’t eat His flesh, and drink His blood, that they have no life in them.
Click to expand...
Does not mean they are damned. Just no life in them here on earth. Not seeker friendly. Just consistent:)
 
sandusky said:
The CC is inconsistent in this, and should be proclaiming to all who don’t imbibe of the eucharist in the manner in which she describes, that they do not have eternal life.

ISTM that Extra Eccelsiam nulla salus has quietly been put to death by the CC.
Click to expand...
Sorry but we never had that as doctrine unlike your Sola Fide hard and fast rule of believe or you’re damned.

Oh but wouldn’t you want us to say we do. No can do. We don’t believe it.
 
ralphinal said:
You said that much better than I did.

Why are we having trouble explaining this to Sandusky?
Click to expand...
Because he’s the magisterium, the sole determiner of all he believes and all we believe even if we don’t believe what he says we believe.🙂
 
benedictus2 said:
Because he’s the magisterium, the sole determiner of all he believes and all we believe even if we don’t believe what he says we believe.🙂
Click to expand...
Oh. Wait. Do we beleive what we beleive that he beleives that we do not beleive?

I am lost:p
 
sandusky said:
He says of those who don’t eat His flesh, and drink His blood, that they have no life in them.

The CC is inconsistent in this, and should be proclaiming to all who don’t imbibe of the eucharist in the manner in which she describes, that they do not have eternal life.

ISTM that Extra Eccelsiam nulla salus has quietly been put to death by the CC.

Wonder what’s next for the CC on the smorgasbord list of what is no longer to be believed?

Yes, God is on the top of the mountain, and there are many paths to him, grasshopper.

Seeker-friendly. :hmmm:
Click to expand...
Yes of course you only want one path because you want everyone else who is not on the road marked Sola Fide to go burn in hell. So bloodthirstyl Not very Chritian don’t you think?
 
ralphinal said:
Oh. Wait. Do we beleive what we beleive that he beleives that we do not beleive?

I am lost:p
Click to expand...
I think I will sign off for now. It’s 2:24 a.m. here in Melbourne and my head is getting lost in the beliefs.😃
 
40.png
ralphinal:
Look at John 3. Jesus said that you must be born again or water and the Spirit. That is baptism.
Click to expand...
Has your church infallibly and divinely defined the passage of which you speak?
40.png
ralphinal:
Look at John 6. He never says that you must eat his flesh and drink his blood or you cannot be saved.
Click to expand...
Of course He hasn’t because salvation is predicated on belief. That’s the whole thrust of the passage from v26 to the—coming and believing for the alleviation of spiritual hunger and thirst.

You speak of John 3, what of John 4? Whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never thirst, but the water will become a well of water springing up to eternal life.”

On that, why doesn’t the church require that you drink a bunch of water???
40.png
ralphinal:
Besides, we did not choose for you guys to leave.
Click to expand...
Christ brings His to His gospel; where the gospel is not found, His are not found.
 
benedictus2 said:
If you re-read my post it said CAN live like that. I did not say LIVES like that. The point I am trying to make is that our beliefs drive our actions.

And it is true, Catholics do not need to **read **the Bible. If you are a Church going Catholic and you pay attention at Mass, you will get great dollops of Scripture and more besides.

Example: Weekday Mass: Reading from Epistles or OT, Psalms then Gospel.

Sunday mass: Reading from OT, Psalms, then Epistles then Gospel. And if you are lucky, you might even get a very good explanation of this in the homily so you are not left to figure out what the passage means.

If you are a daily communicant, you will have heard the Bible proclaimed in 3 years. And that is how people used to be Evangelized before te advent of the printing press.

At Mass, most parishes also give out the Mass guide with the readings included. It is actually discourteous to read it, when it is already being proclaimed. One is supposed to listen to it proclaimed.

However, while we do not need to read the Bible it is very much encouraged to read it because not everyone is a daily church goer and some Mass readers are not all that great at enunciation.

As for confession, absolution has been withheld when a priest is absolutely certain that the so called penitent is not really sorry and fully intends to commit the sin again. But that I believe is rare.
Click to expand...
Yes we have the exact same readings each Suday in my Lutheran Church. I was raised Catholic I have been to both Catholic and Lutheran churchs on the same day. We have the exact same Readings Two readings a paslm reading then the Gospel reading. The fourm of worship is almost identical. There are parts of a Elca Luthern Worship that were once used by the Catholic church before Vatican II. There are some Elca Churches that have other forums of worship. However most Elca Luthern churches follow a Format in the Book of worship. I have compared them to a Lattin Mass Missalete and there are a surprising number of similar verbage. I have noticed The Lutheran church signs a few more hyms. We sing the Kyre and the hym of praise. an anthem is sung by a soloist the Chior or a bell choir. The entire worship service is very moving including the comunion at the rail. also confession is avaliable with the parish pastor. So there you go
 
sandusky said:
Has your church infallibly and divinely defined the passage of which you speak?
Click to expand...
I think so. If I am not mistaken, that verse HAS to be understood to mean baptism. There are only a handful of verses that are dogmatically defined, and this is one. I will try to run down the proof for you.
Of course He hasn’t because salvation is predicated on belief. That’s the whole thrust of the passage from v26 to the—coming and believing for the alleviation of spiritual hunger and thirst.
Click to expand...
If salvation is based only on belief, why did Jesus require baptism?
You speak of John 3, what of John 4? Whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never thirst, but the water will become a well of water springing up to eternal life.”
Click to expand...
On that, why doesn’t the church require that you drink a bunch of water???
Click to expand...
Because bathrooms used to be outside 😉 . Obviously because that is not what Jesus is saying. He did however say that his flesh was food and his blood was drink, that we must eat and drink his flesh and blood, and that the bread and wine were his flesh and blood. Or did he not say these things?
Christ brings His to His gospel; where the gospel is not found, His are not found.
Click to expand...
I agree. But, who has the ENTIRE Gospel? See, we see the entire Gosple in the Catholic Church. We are called to beleive, take up our cross, and follow Christ. We cannot be saved on faith unless we prove we have faith by taking up out cross and following him.

Can you say, without a doubt, that every verse in the New Testement is proclaimed in your Church? Is James taught at all?

Does your pastor preach more from Paul or from the Gosples?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top