If you receive Holy Communion in a state of grace, then yes, you would be eating Christ’s flesh, just as He commands us to in John 6, and it would give you the grace of Eternal Life, just as He promises us, in the same chapter.
Jesus does not always clarify things, if indeed they were unclear.the people Jesus was speaking to took him literally. and many left him. He did not call them back saying " wait! you mis undrstood me!" they knew exactly what he was saying. peace
There is no " grace of eternal life" There IS being justified by his grace and made heirs for eternal life.If you receive Holy Communion in a state of grace, then yes, you would be eating Christ’s flesh, just as He commands us to in John 6, and it would give you the grace of Eternal Life, just as He promises us, in the same chapter.
Of course, in order to receive worthily, you would have to become a Catholic, and make your First Confession, and receive the Sacrament of Confirmation, first. This is how one prepares one’s soul to receive Holy Communion.
It is Christ who has “added” it - not me. It’s right there in the Bible for anyone with understanding and sense to read.
I feel the same way about what I have said!It is Christ who has “added” it - not me. It’s right there in the Bible for anyone with understanding and sense to read.
ok,ill accept that just for the sake of argument. but what about clement who paul mentions. he was a desciple of peter and possibly paul. he taught the real presence. and if you want to get more specific we can go to justin martyr. look up his first apology chapter 66. it was written around ad 148-155 give or take. he specifically states that after the prayers are said. the bread and wine truly do become the Incarnate Christ. many things later on clarified what Jesus meant. you cannot have sacred scripture without sacred tradition. much of what the apostles taught was written down later.
Clement does not teach the Eucharist. You are confused. Perhaps you meant Ignatius? I think that Ignatius is an interesting person. It would be a different thread to talk about what he does believe. But I must tell you, when two different forms of a letter are known to exist and are dramatically different, I have to wonder if there is a third without all the interpolations. As far as the early church fathers, I have said before that in Revelation you have the churches full of doctrinal errors. I do not ascribe to an era when things were just wonderful because I do not believe scripture teaches that.
will get back to you on clement. but yes ignatious also. and what about the didache chapter 9:5 and chapter 14? which the early Church fathers treated as an authoratative text?
The Didache absolutely does not teach the Catholic view! In fact, well, I will let use a link for that!will get back to you on clement. but yes ignatious also. and what about the didache chapter 9:5 and chapter 14? which the early Church fathers treated as an authoratative text?
ok read clements paedagogus volume 1 pg 37-38. weather you want to believe it or not the early Church fathers did teach the real presence. including clement. will look up your links tho. this should be fun.
Insinuate that the early Church fathers were doctrinally in error to say that 2000 years later, a splintered group from the reformation has it right? :tsktsk:
thank you sooo much prodical.Insinuate that the early Church fathers were doctrinally in error to say that 2000 years later, a splintered group from the reformation has it right? :tsktsk:
Protestants will deny the writings of the early Church fathers because the doctrines they wrote and taught were Catholic. Protestants rely on the Bible, the Bible that the Catholic Church preserved for 1500 years so that they could have it and interpret it better than the keepers of the sacred scriptures.
Produce any writings, from any other Churches of that era that your willing to affiliate your beliefs with. If there were none, then there can be no truth today, from any source, including a Bible that came from the Church you claim has errored in doctrines.
Scriptures teach that the Church of the living God is the pillar and ground of truth and that the manifold wisdom of God maybe made known through the Church. Scriptures do not teach that scriptures alone are the sole authority.
also one of the links he gave from just for Catholics is interesting. i dont think these protestant groups really understand what the mass really is. aside from the real presence. they think we are re-crucifying the Lord! will p.m. you about this. its too deep. and i would suggest protestants go take classes from the Church to fully understand the meaning of what the mass is. im afraid if i write it here, it will cause to much confusion for our protestant friends. gonna leave rightly divide to you. you got better resources than i God Bless and PeaceHere is a link to free online courses, including “The Lamb’s Supper: The Bible and the Mass”, by Scott Hahn, former Presbyterian that converted himself to Catholicism through his studies.thank you sooo much prodical.
You are confusing Clements benedict. The one who wrote what you are referring to wrotearound 75 to a hundred years after the one who knew Paul…and perhaps Peter as you also stated.
What does this meant to you then?
yes you are correct rightly divide. i did get them confuse. but are you going to use my senility to dodge all the other evidence? the facts are the early Church fathers did teach the Real Presence. the links you gave me were from what? a bible church? and an evangelization to Catholics page.
This was not a parable Zach.
That is why the Didache was such a great find. It agrees with my view! It was discarded and luckily found.yes you are correct rightly divide. i did get them confuse. but are you going to use my senility to dodge all the other evidence? the facts are the early Church fathers did teach the Real Presence. the links you gave me were from what? a bible church? and an evangelization to Catholics page.
whats your answer to prodical son? ill admit his ducks are probably in a better row than mine. but the fact remains, the real presence was and still is taught.
Here was His explanation,
how does it agree with your view?
come to think of it, how do any of the Church fathers agree with your view? Peace.