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

[StMarina303ad]

LOL.

It is interesting to see the extent of denial to which you will stretch in order to hold on to your reformed theology. Do you really believe that the holy martyr St Ignatius, being the disciple of St John the Apostle, decided to give a private opinion (and acording you, the wrong opinion) regarding the Holy Eucharist?

Your posts are becoming incredulous!

We also know that St. Ignatius was the young child sat on Jesus’ lap when He is quoted in Scripture saying, “Let the little children come unto Me.”

Since a child, St. Ignatius was soaked in the Truth that Jesus taught - from Jesus’ mouth and from St. John the Apostle after Christ’s death, resurrection and ascension. St. Ignatius would hardly misrepresent what Christ said since he also became a martyr for Him.

 

[sandusky]

So, you are saying that Jesus is limited to the rules of Creation?

Or, are you saying that all things are not possible with God?

Or, are you simply making a guess based on your theology?

I’m telling you what the scripture says.

 

[ralphinal]

I’m telling you what the scripture says.

So the Scripture says that he can only be in one place at a time?

Or does it just say that Jesus is seated at the Right Hand of the Father and will return again to Judge the Living and the Dead?

 

[Mickey]

We also know that St. Ignatius was the young child sat on Jesus’ lap when He is quoted in Scripture saying, “Let the little children come unto Me.”

Since a child, St. Ignatius was soaked in the Truth that Jesus taught - from Jesus’ mouth and from St. John the Apostle after Christ’s death, resurrection and ascension. St. Ignatius would hardly misrepresent what Christ said since he also became a martyr for Him.

Amen StMarina! Mr sandusky’s posts are becoming desparate. He has been trying to disprove the “Real Presence” on this forum for years. He will never succeed!

 

[Mickey]

So the Scripture says that he can only be in one place at a time?

Or does it just say that Jesus is seated at the Right Hand of the Father and will return again to Judge the Living and the Dead?

Matthew 28:16-20
And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And seeing them they adored: but some doubted. And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

 

[StMarina303ad]

Thanks for that. (It’s a lot more than I actually asked for – not that there’s anything wrong with that. )

With regard to ecumenism, I guess I’m a moderate (not euphorically optimistic, but not glumily pessimistic either ) but I appreciate hearing your point of view.

P.S. I notice you brought up the camel and eye-of-needle passage at 2:23 (EST). I wonder how long it will be till someone says "Well you know, when he said ‘the eye of a needle’ what Jesus really meant was … "

The “Eye of a Needle” was the name given to the very small gate/narrow side gate to enter the city of Jeruselem - where it people could easily enter; however, to try to get a camel loaded down with lots of “things” aka worldly possessions would be impossible.

No one has an issue with Jesus saying this unless they (or their Tradition) has lost the historical context of this saying.

If your Tradition doesn’t teach you these things because they have lost the knowledge at some point over the last 2000 years or because your Tradition is younger than 2000 years…leave it and join the Orthodox Church!

To miss it so big on Sacred Scripture is to miss it on Christ - we can not afford to miss it on Christ! Become Orthodox!

 

[pismopal]

I’m telling you what the scripture says.

Since you are on the subject of scripture…what do you think of Christ’s discourse on the Bread of Life in John 6? What does scripture “say” there? How is the Catholic understanding and practise differ from your own…and why?

 

[sandusky]

So the Scripture says that he can only be in one place at a time?

Or does it just say that Jesus is seated at the Right Hand of the Father and will return again to Judge the Living and the Dead?

I know you can read, Ralph.

 

[ralphinal]

I know you can read, Ralph.

I can, but it seems that we are not always reading the same thing.

 

[sandusky]

I can, but it seems that we are not always reading the same thing.

No, it’s the same; perhaps it’s your eye that’s at fault.

 

[StMarina303ad]

Papal Supremacy if you can call it that is nothing more than saying that the Pope is first among bishops in the same way that Peter was singled out by the Lord. Okay, then you would agree than that both the Patriarch of Antioch and the Patriarch of Rome would both be Supreme on that definition because both were founded by St. Peter - Antioch being the first Church he started.

Papal Infallability is not quite how those outside (and even those inside the Church) understand it. You’re right it doesn’t make sense since the Early Church never believed or taught that the Church was infallible in the person of one man. The head (and only head) of the Church is Christ and it is His Holy Spirit which guides it in all Truth as Jesus promised and as the New Testament in Acts shows this is not in one person (or two people if you take St. Peter’s actual successorship seriously), but it is in the Councils of the Church.

All it means is that under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the Pope is guaranteed not to teach error as regards faith or moral when speaking ex-cathedra). This does not include however any statement he makes as a private person or a private scholar. Infallibility also applies to the body of bishops as a whole when in moral unity, they teach a doctrine as true. Okay, but you have two true successors of St. Peter - one in Antioch and one in Rome. Neither agree on the Faith clearly illustrated in the Nicean Constantinoplian Creed: Antioch accepts the original Creed as determined by those two Church Councils; however, Rome accepts an addition which has been proven repeatly to be against the Theology of the Most Holy Trinity as revealed in Sacred Scripture and in the Church Councils. Infallibility is in the Church through the Councils, not in one person - one of two who are legitimate successors of the Apostle St. Peter.

Think about it, if the Pope and the college of bishops is not infallible, how do we know that the Bible is truly the word of God since they were the ones who decreed it to be so? You error when you say Infallibility in is the person of the Pope (of Rome) - it is and always has been historically proven to be in the Church through the Councils.

When you come to think of it,

 

[StMarina303ad]

What I was taught anyone who believes in the Father, Son, and Holy SPirit and excepts Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior and obey’s his commandments is a Christian.

Then it’s a shame you have been misinformed. Find out what True Christianity is: www.goarch.org

 

[ncgolf]

I’m telling you what the scripture says.

I and others have quoted Jesus’s words in John 6 in this and other threads with you … and in those you tell us what Jesus means when He uses the words “flesh”, “eat” etc. You make it clear that it should be obvious he does not mean real eating of His body.

Why does not what “Scripture says” work in the same way with Jesus’ own words in John 6?

Jesus’s words are plain and simple … repeated more than once in that discourse but you never used the words “Scripture says” in any of your responses. Why is not “Scripture says” enough for Jesus’s own words … I would think that is the best place to use that phrase for the Lord said so himself … no filter needed.

I think it is obvious Jesus is in heaven but Scripture does not limit Him to only that place … He is God and free to move about creation as He sees fit. If you live in Southern California … that is a fact but by no means does it mean that you could be, have been or will be in Paris. I am not creating ambiguity by saying you live in LA but are seen in Paris.

 

[Mickey]

I and others have quoted Jesus’s words in John 6 in this and other threads with you … and in those you tell us what Jesus means when He uses the words “flesh”, “eat” etc. You make it clear that it should be obvious he does not mean real eating of His body.

Why does not what “Scripture says” work in the same way with Jesus’ own words in John 6?

Jesus’s words are plain and simple … repeated more than once in that discourse but you never used the words “Scripture says” in any of your responses. Why is not “Scripture says” enough for Jesus’s own words … I would think that is the best place to use that phrase for the Lord said so himself … no filter needed.

I think it is obvious Jesus is in heaven but Scripture does not limit Him to only that place … He is God and free to move about creation as He sees fit. If you live in Southern California … that is a fact but by no means does it mean that you could be, have been or will be in Paris. I am not creating ambiguity by saying you live in LA but are seen in Paris.

 

[StMarina303ad]

This has been a strange thread.

I agree with Sandusky et al., that non-Catholics who do not accept the Real Presence are still Christians, assuming that they are properly baptized.

I disagree with him about why they do not accept the Real Presence.

And on both fronts, I am stating the official teachings of the Catholic Church.

The only problem with this reasoning is this:
The only “Follower of Christ”, who remained a Follower of Christ after Jesus’ preaching as recorded in John 6, while not believing Jesus words about eating His Flesh and Drinking His Blood in Holy Eucharist is Judas and according to Jesus, in the last verse in John 6, Judas remained a “follower of Jesus” in order to attempt to destroy Christianity from within. Judas is the ultimate traitor of Christianity.

One who claims to be a Christian, even if validly baptized, who at the same time continues to reject Jesus in the Holy Eucharist is exactly like Judas…“it would have been better for him if he had not been born”.

Protestants have to think and pray long and hard…do you really want to be another Judas?

As you can clearly see, no one can accuse me of being opinionated - But I hope I am able to convey how serious a matter this is as someone stance on the Eucharist has huge consequences for that person eternally - Christ’s very words, “you have NO Life in you” - “unless you Eat My Flesh and Drink My Blood”.

 

[sandusky]

I and others have quoted Jesus’s words in John 6 in this and other threads with you … and in those you tell us what Jesus means when He uses the words “flesh”, “eat” etc. You make it clear that it should be obvious he does not mean real eating of His body.

Why does not what “Scripture says” work in the same way with Jesus’ own words in John 6?

Jesus’s words are plain and simple … repeated more than once in that discourse but you never used the words “Scripture says” in any of your responses. Why is not “Scripture says” enough for Jesus’s own words … I would think that is the best place to use that phrase for the Lord said so himself … no filter needed.

I think it is obvious Jesus is in heaven but Scripture does not limit Him to only that place … He is God and free to move about creation as He sees fit. If you live in Southern California … that is a fact but by no means does it mean that you could be, have been or will be in Paris. I am not creating ambiguity by saying you live in LA but are seen in Paris.

I’ve been stating, with respect to John 6, what scriptures says.

With respect to Christ, you are creating ambiguity as to where He resides, and that He will return a second time.

Believing transubstantiation is your choice, as is bowing down in adoration and worship of the elements thereof.

 

[Mickey]

I’ve been stating, with respect to John 6, what scriptures says.

Wrong.

You have been “stating” a “different Gospel.”

 

[rinnie]

Then it’s a shame you have been misinformed. Find out what True Christianity is: www.goarch.org

How could I be misinformed, I follow the Church that Jesus started. The same teachings of the Apostles. I follow apostolic succession. Why would I stray away from the apostolic succession? To whom do I go. Jesus told me to stay true to the teachings of the Church and not do that. Why would I disobey Christ?

 

[SyCarl]

As you can clearly see, no one can accuse me of being opinionated - But I hope I am able to convey how serious a matter this is as someone stance on the Eucharist has huge consequences for that person eternally - Christ’s very words, “you have NO Life in you” - “unless you Eat My Flesh and Drink My Blood”.

So are you saying that Jesus is contradicting what He says in John 6:40 and 47, where He says that everyone who believes in Him has eternal life, because what He really meant to say was believe and receive the Eucharist?

 

[Mickey]

So are you saying that Jesus is contradicting what He says in John 6:40 and 47

Keep reading. What else does He say? There is no contradiction.

{The} Blood of the Lord is salvation for our souls, with it the soul rejoices, with it, it is beautified, it is warmed; this Blood makes the mind shine more brightly than the light, it makes the soul more beautiful than gold. Those who partake of this Body stand with the angels and archangels and the powers above; with it they are adorned with royal robes and the weapons of the Spirit. Those who receive Communion receive the very King Himself. On Holy Communion, the Purifying Treasure.
St. Nicodemos of the HolyMountain