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

[happilycatholic]

I have to strongly disagree. If someone believes in the Trinity, believes that Jesus suffered and died for their salvation and will receive it thru His mercy then they are Christian. Because their sincere belief is not exactly the same as ours does not make them a non-Christian. It makes them a Christian “without the fullness of the faith”. I would just venture a guess here that even the Pope would give you an argument on this one.

If that were true then satan would be a Christian.

Oh, satan definitely beleives in The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit. And he absolutely knows that The Son came here to free us from his bonds. And at one time satan believed and took no other over God, so he knows God intimately. Satan is the original sinner who thought he’d go it on his own and found a better way.

We are not saved by faith alone. We are not saved by simply “believing”. I used to say that too.

 

[reteeks21]

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.

Thanks for educating me on that one. I see how the approach to Bible reading that you gave can be very beneficial. Sorry for coming on too strong. I do appreciate the lesson.

 

[StMarina303ad]

LOL, well as a Friend, at least I know where I stand with those of you who require baptism with water. I’m content to simply be a “Friend”…but I will call myself a Christian as well…it’s not any church or organization that defines who I am, it is the One who has spoken to my condition and brought me out of my darkness into His Light…I may not be a “christian” by your definition…but I am enough of one by mine.

It’s not my requirement…it’s Christ’s requirements.

 

[Publisher]

It’s not my requirement…it’s Christ’s requirements.

Yes of course.

 

[StMarina303ad]

I find it rather interesting that no one thought to bring up this point in the “Do Catholics consider Protestants to be Christian?” thread. The question, “Do you believe based on my profession of faith that I am condemned to hell?” certainly seems extremely relevant to any discussion of ecumenism.

I’m not speaking on behalf of Catholics, being Orthodox and all, but Jesus clearly revealed to the Apostles who inturn have handed down generation after generation after generation, etc. for 2000 years how someone is saved/deified. It is completely clear who is in and who is not in His Church.

However, just because someone is in His Church does not mean they are saved or visa versa.

It would be very difficult for someone who was a practicing Orthodox Christian to *not be *saved, but it is possible & likewise, it would be very difficult for someone who is not a practicing Orthodox Christian *to be *saved, but it is possible.

The Most Holy Trinity did not send down the Word to take on Human Flesh, to be born into Time and Space, to live and then suffer and die on the Cross and establish His Church for the fun of it. The Most Holy Trinity did it because we needed the Church to show us the way to salvation and it just so happens that the Most Holy Trinity loves us enough that the Father was willing to watch this happen to His Son, the Word was willing to go through all that to show us and give us what we needed and the Holy Spirit was willing to stand by Christ while He was on earth and to continue to stand by His Church to guide and direct it in all Truth. By rejecting His Church, one is simply rejecting the Holy Trinity - pure and simple. One calling themselves a Christian while rejecting His Church - that person is in more need of Christ’s Mercy than someone who has never heard the Name of Jesus because it is blasphemy. The Holy Spirit didn’t come to guide individuals, but His Church Community as a whole: via the Councils of Bishops to prevent the gates of Hell from prevailing.

With God all things are possible. And thanks be to Him, He shows Mercy to us all!

This thread isn’t about who is saved and who is not saved…it’s about who is an actual Christian and who is not. Please do not confuse the two distinct issues.

 

[sandusky]

ralphinal:

If salvation is based only on belief, why did Jesus require baptism?

To which statement of Jesus are you specifically referring?

ralphinal:

Obviously because that is not what Jesus is saying.

It is what Jesus is saying, in fact, those who understand what He’s saying, drink of this water continuously.

ralphinal:

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.

As He spoke figuratively concerning the water He gives, and its leading to a well of water springing up in the believer to eternal life, so He speaks in John 6. ( see here with parallel between v40 and 54.)

ralphinal:

Or did he not say these things?

There’s no dispute over what He said; the dispute is over what He meant by what He said.

ralphinal:

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.

IMO, that’s nothing more than a mindless mantra the Catholic falls back on when he doesn’t know what else to say.

ralphinal:

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

Without a doubt.

ralphinal:

Does your pastor preach more from Paul or from the Gosples?

We have been in the Gospel of Luke for the past 10 years, and are about to move to the final chapter.

 

[adstrinity]

I have a problem with the interpretation of John 6 by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches for a number of reasons.

One of Jesus’ statements is:

This is an unconditional promise that if anyone eats of that bread will have eternal life.

He basically repeat this a couple of verses later.

This is another unconditional statement.

Does this mean if I, or anyone else, goes to a Catholic or Orthodox Church and illicitly receives the Eucharist, does that mean that I will automatically have eternal life? I would have done precisely what Jesus says in these verses even if I didn’t believe since the change in the elements depends only on the consecration. There was a question in Ask an Apologist of what would happen if a dog ate a host that fell on the floor. The answer was that the dog would have eaten Jesus’ body and blood. thread=259122[/thread]Jesus must mean something other than the ordinary sense of these words since we know that faith is required. If He did not mean them to be taken literally, why should we take them as being so?

I never made it past the first page of this thread.

Maybe all does not mean all…

 

[StMarina303ad]

Brace yourself, I am about to talk Scripture to explain it.

Anyway, Jesus said that to have eternal life, you must be born again of water and the Spirit. We have always understood that to mean Baptism as well as daily conversion to Christ from sin.

The John 6 passage talks about having life WITHIN you. In other words, partaking of Heaven while on earth. Jesus does not say that you must eat his flesh to have eternal life (Baptism is required for that) but he says that if you do not, you will not have the Life within you while on earth.

Does that make sense?

Brace yourself, I’m about to explain to you how it is that you are missing it so big on this Scripture.

You do not have the authority to interpret or explain Scripture.

Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to His Church to guide it in all Truth which is why the Church as a whole has the power and authority to interpret and explain Scripture.

Long before any Protestant Church was invented in the 1500’s and long before the Catholic Church separated itself from the rest of the Orthodox Church in the 1000’s, We’re talking all the way back in the first century, the Church by the power and guidance of the Holy Spirit interpreted and explained *and still now continues *to interpret and explain that passage to mean that Jesus meant exactly what He said - we must eat His Flesh and we must Drink His Blood to have Life within us.

But don’t take my word for it, read the Church Fathers and read the Pagan/Anti-Christian writings of the time - both sides makes it clear that true Christians eat and drank Jesus’ Body and Blood.

 

[StMarina303ad]

This is not accurate. Confession is “given” quite frequently-- every week in fact. Whether or not a Catholic chooses to avail him/herself of it is another thing. But, it is available at any time. Frequent reception of the Sacrament of Reconciliation is encourage. It is certainly required for anyone in a state of mortal sin.

I said Most Catholics - not all. And if you read your Catechism, it says that one of the Precepts of the Church is to receive Confession at least once a year. Not every person claiming to be a Catholic does this once a year and some Catholics do go more often. I’ve heard it said the Pope John Paul II went to Confession on a daily basis.

This is not true. Any Catholic who is ill can receive the Anointing of the Sick, not just those who are dieing.

That way I said usually.

I’m not sure what you mean by “forbidden from practicing their marriage.” There is no such restriction on an Eastern Rite Catholic priest or those married men admitted to the priesthood through the Pastoral Provision (Episcopal priests who convert).

**Notice I used the words “Roman Catholic” not Eastern Catholic. And yes those who are married Roman Catholic men are not eligible for Holy Orders. **

 

[Gamera]

Has your church infallibly and divinely defined the passage of which you speak?

Yes. Actually John 3:5 is one of the very few (14 maybe?) Scriptural verses which the Catholic Church has infallibly interpreted. We are required to believe that the “water” of John 3:5 means real baptismal water.

I can’t cite the document from memory but if it’s really an issue I can track it down.

 

[StMarina303ad]

**
John 10
7 Then Jesus said to them again, “Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who ever came before Me[a] are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.
**

Is there a physical door somewhere with the Real presence of Jesus?

**
John 15
1"I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener.
**

Is there a real vine, somewhere with the Real presence of Jesus?

**
Hebrews 9
22In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
**

Cat of RC church says Jesus offered himself first in the last supper before the cross. In an unbloody matter? How is it the same if one is bloody and the other is not.
1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: “The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different.” “And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner.* . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory.”

No daily sacrifice needed. Jesus died once for all time. No repeated daily sacrifice needed. This is straight forward language.

**
Hebrews 10

11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. 14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.
15 But the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before,
16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them,”[c] 17 then He adds, “Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”
**

Individuals confusion about Scripture is exactly why Jesus asked the Father to give the Holy Spirit to guide, not individuals, but His Church.

 

[StMarina303ad]

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.

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.

I just want to point out again that this is not about who is saved or not saved, this post is about who is an actual Christian and who is not

 

[StMarina303ad]

Oh. Wait. Do we beleive what we beleive that he beleives that we do not beleive?

I am lost

Ralph, my mom is a school teacher, so this is really coming from her not me: “i” before “e” except after "c". Being that I’ve heard it so much from her, I couldn’t help, but to share. Marina

 

[Gamera]

I just want to point out again that this is not about who is saved or not saved, this post is about who is an actual Christian and who is not

Funny how threads take on a life of their own. You can open a thread entitled “Should Catholic school parents get tuition tax credit?” and find a two-page argument about whether to bury a St Joseph statute to sell a house.

 

[StMarina303ad]

Funny how threads take on a life of their own. You can open a thread entitled “Should Catholic school parents get tuition tax credit?” and find a two-page argument about whether to bury a St Joseph statute to sell a house.

Threads are funny that way, aren’t they?

BTW: My 3rd job is at a Catholic bookstore and we are always out of that statue - even people who are not Catholic come in to buy his statue to bury it upside down so they can sell their house. We keep telling it, it shouldn’t be buried but set in a place of honor in their home and for them to pray for his intercession. Who came up with the idea of burying his upside down anyway?

 

[rbarcia]

Individuals confusion about Scripture is exactly why Jesus asked the Father to give the Holy Spirit to guide, not individuals, but His Church.

what confusion?

 

[StMarina303ad]

what confusion?

I was responding to someone’s post who was clearly confused about what Sacred Scripture meant in various passages.

Of course that person would not have any confusion at all if he or she was a Christian, a member of the Church established by the Most Holy Trinity, he or she would already know (being taught from a young age) what those passages meant by the Church because the Holy Spirit guides the Church in all Truth - including the Truth of written Tradition aka the Bible/Sacred Scripture.

 

[BSHoop96]

Threads are funny that way, aren’t they?

BTW: My 3rd job is at a Catholic bookstore and we are always out of that statue - even people who are not Catholic come in to buy his statue to bury it upside down so they can sell their house. We keep telling it, it shouldn’t be buried but set in a place of honor in their home and for them to pray for his intercession. Who came up with the idea of burying his upside down anyway?

And we wonder why non-Catholics often times think we’re a little weird…

 

[BSHoop96]

If that were true then satan would be a Christian.

Oh, satan definitely beleives in The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit. And he absolutely knows that The Son came here to free us from his bonds. And at one time satan believed and took no other over God, so he knows God intimately. Satan is the original sinner who thought he’d go it on his own and found a better way.

We are not saved by faith alone. We are not saved by simply “believing”. I used to say that too.

Oh good grief that’s not what I’m saying. The original question was **“can a person who does not receive the Eucharist call themselves a Christian”. **My answer is yes.

If it will make it simpler, let me put it this way.

There is a practicing Catholic living a well-formed Catholic life in accordance to the Church. They are a Christian.

There is a practicing *(HERE insert person of any faith you wish that believes in the Trinity and Jesus, etc. but not the real presence, just symbolism) *and they are leading a good and moral life. They are Christian.…but they don’t have the fullness of the Catholic faith.

Falling away or rejecting your faith, whatever it is, is another whole thread.

 

[Harpazo]

I’m not speaking on behalf of Catholics, being Orthodox and all, but Jesus clearly revealed to the Apostles who inturn have handed down generation after generation after generation, etc. for 2000 years how someone is saved/deified. It is completely clear who is in and who is not in His Church.

However, just because someone is in His Church does not mean they are saved or visa versa.

It would be very difficult for someone who was a practicing Orthodox Christian to *not be *saved, but it is possible & likewise, it would be very difficult for someone who is not a practicing Orthodox Christian *to be *saved, but it is possible.

The Most Holy Trinity did not send down the Word to take on Human Flesh, to be born into Time and Space, to live and then suffer and die on the Cross and establish His Church for the fun of it. The Most Holy Trinity did it because we needed the Church to show us the way to salvation and it just so happens that the Most Holy Trinity loves us enough that the Father was willing to watch this happen to His Son, the Word was willing to go through all that to show us and give us what we needed and the Holy Spirit was willing to stand by Christ while He was on earth and to continue to stand by His Church to guide and direct it in all Truth. By rejecting His Church, one is simply rejecting the Holy Trinity - pure and simple. One calling themselves a Christian while rejecting His Church - that person is in more need of Christ’s Mercy than someone who has never heard the Name of Jesus because it is blasphemy. The Holy Spirit didn’t come to guide individuals, but His Church Community as a whole: via the Councils of Bishops to prevent the gates of Hell from prevailing.

With God all things are possible. And thanks be to Him, He shows Mercy to us all!

This thread isn’t about who is saved and who is not saved…it’s about who is an actual Christian and who is not. Please do not confuse the two distinct issues.

Shlom lekh,

Beautifully said! You said what I’ve been trying to say. Keeping fighting the good fight!

Alloho minokhoun,
Andrew