Catholics lack common sense.

[KathleenGee]

Gabriel 12, and others, did excellent work with historical witness to the early church…What else can you say?

I don’t know how another could deny the given facts…

Blessings to all of you this Thanksgiving…

 

[SeanTom]

Gabriel 12, and others, did excellent work with historical witness to the early church…What else can you say?

I don’t know how another could deny the given facts…

Blessings to all of you this Thanksgiving…

---

Timothy Piper,

Ok., enough is enough. If for some reason I am wrong in my understanding of the Eucharist, (And I don’t believe that I am), then God will know what is in my heart and will also know that I have done nothing in this belief which would offend Him.

BUT, what if you are wrong in your understanding and refuse to believe what God has said in Scripture, which is His Word? Hmmmm, you should give that some serious thought. I believe if I were you I would continue to do everything you can to find out about the validity of your beliefs.

Please know that I have no qualms with you nor do I fault you for your beliefs, but I do believe you should seek further teachings on this subject so that when you come before Jesus at the end times, you will have an answer which may determine your eternal future.

 

[KathleenGee]

Sean…

Why the Lord instituted His church upon the rock of Peter…At daily Mass, lady brought up regarding the alleged remains of St. Peter under his altar at the Vatican…and there were no feet to the remains, just as Peter died…

Yes, we follow the Lord objectively and not arbitrarily.

Happy Thanksgiving to all…

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Greetings KathleenGee, and SeanTom; I pray The Holy Spirit sheds light on the shadows of misunderstandings of the body of Jesus Christ.

Timothy Piper mentioned something negative against Liturgies and Catholic Rites. I think he called them rituals from a negative expression. How would either of you comment to this accusation? I dont know if Timothy ever seen a Mass or understand what Liturgy means = Public Worship. Most non catholics lack the knowledge that God has always included “Rites” in his instruction of his liturgies in atonement, sacrifices and feasts.

Jesus remains a high Priestly King and Prophet, Jesus commanded his apostles to “do this in remeberance of me”. Instituting his Eucharistic banguet of the wedding feast of the lamb.

I wonder if Catholics are viewed of lacking common sense, because Non catholics are lacking knowledge of God in these mysteries when they dont have true presence of Jesus, but a symbolic presence of Jesus from their emotions which they interpret to mean the spirit. I find a huge difference between my emotions and enlightenments of revelation from the Holy Spirit and the True presence of Jesus Christ body, blood soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. I think this is the Hidden factor, non catholics confuse emotions, enlightenments, revelations, with who Jesus is and label these feelings as Spirit. This is not lacking common sense, this is non catholics moved by every new wind of doctrine, and coming to a belief system of a new gospel never heard of or practiced.

Just a thought in closing, peace be with you

 

[SeanTom]

I think it is time for me to back out of these postings. There are beliefs that we Catholics have that non-Catholics will probably never understand, or at least will never even consider our beliefs even by delving further into our Catholic teachings. Reviewing all of the postings on this topic, I see that we are making little, if any, headway with our attempts to clarify our beliefs to non- Catholics. We appear to be at a standstill. As A Roman Catholic I believe in every point I made as I am taught from Scripture, and also from our Catholic Catechism. No one will ever change my mind, and unless some non-Catholics have an open mind, we will never be able to get them to understand why we believe in what we do. This is sad.

But it all boils down to how Jesus will view our beliefs and good works when we come before Him at the time of our judgment. I would rather believe what I believe, and if I’m wrong, what I do believe should not not be offensive to God. But I believe it would be offensive to God if I turn my back on what He is telling us by His Word as given to us in Scripture as further defined in our Catechism.

It all boils down to how our Lord considers what is in our hearts and why we favor one belief over another. I believe with all my heart and soul what I learn from God’s word and from our Catechism. My conscience is clear and I have absolutely no doubts as to the journey I am taking on my way to God’s Kingdom. THAT is why I am a Roman Catholic and THAT is why I shall remain a Roman Catholic.

May our Lord bless and enlighten you all in His ways.

 

[joe370]

So I was just reading the Westminister Confession of Faith, to see how I can talk to my friend who is Presbyterian better…
WELL… I came across this:

CHAPTER 29
Of the Lord’s Supper

. Our Lord Jesus, in the night wherein he was betrayed, instituted the sacrament of his body and blood, called the Lord’s Supper, to be observed in his church, unto the end of the world, for the perpetual remembrance of the sacrifice of himself in his death; the sealing all benefits thereof unto true believers, their spiritual nourishment and growth in him, their further engagement in and to all duties which they owe unto him; and, to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other, as members of his mystical body.

1. In this sacrament, Christ is not offered up to his Father; nor any real sacrifice made at all, for remission of sins of the quick or dead; but only a commemoration of that one offering up of himself, by himself, upon the cross, once for all: and a spiritual oblation of all possible praise unto God, for the same: so that the popish sacrifice of the mass (as they call it) is most abominably injurious to Christ’s one, only sacrifice, the alone propitiation for all the sins of his elect.
2. Private masses, or receiving this sacrament by a priest, or any other, alone; as likewise, the denial of the cup to the people, worshiping the elements, the lifting them up, or carrying them about, for adoration, and the reserving them for any pretended religious use; are all contrary to the nature of this sacrament, and to the institution of Christ.
3. The outward elements in this sacrament, duly set apart to the uses ordained by Christ, have such relation to him crucified, as that, truly, yet sacramentally only, they are sometimes called by the name of the things they represent, to wit, the body and blood of Christ; albeit, in substance and nature, they still remain truly and only bread and wine, as they were before.
4. That doctrine which maintains a change of the substance of bread and wine, into the substance of Christ’s body and blood (commonly called transubstantiation) by consecration of a priest, or by any other way, is repugnant, not to Scripture alone, but even to common sense, and reason; overthroweth the nature of the sacrament, and hath been, and is, the cause of manifold superstitions; yea, of** gross idolatries.**

Hopefully the stuff bolded that I wanted to. I see how some people have trouble seeing a different standpoint- because this practically says Catholics lack common sense, we are idolatrious, and are not doing what the Lord commanded of us. Yet at the beginning they say it is his Body and Blood… hmmm.

---

First I would ask your friend: if the CCC is unnecessary (sola scriptura is the Protestant Christians only authority) - then surely the Westminister Confession of Faith is unnecessary?

Secondly: The Catholic church for the first 400 years, believed what the CC teaches and believes today. Were these early Christians belonging to the early CC, as well as all Catholics, traversing the centuries, guilty of Eucharistic idolatry?

 

[KathleenGee]

I didn’t catch Mr. Piper’s background, but he is deeply imbedded with an 1830’s plus mindset…people can be traumatized by the profound effect their ministers make on them with such deliberate anti-Catholic distortions, that they refuse to even reason with whatever sources you give them.

You find such blatant and deliberate refusal to understand other Christians by American fundamentalists is scandalous, and these divisions scandalize both seculars and Muslims.

This cannot grasp the Word Made Flesh…

Because they simply do not want to…

And it is also very hurtful of him with such educated response to him, that he says he is praying for us, and they can’t see our own humanity.

No matter what your historical and documented answers, he will reject you.

The great heresy then was to deny the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. It started with followers who left Christ because they thought He was going to lead them into cannibalism.

For this man to accuse us of eating the flesh of Christ is committing the same loss of faith and willfulness those in the Gospel demonstrated…

and it is a warning for them as well, because those who do not eat of His flesh and drink of His blood will not have life everlasting…

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I think it is time for me to back out of these postings. There are beliefs that we Catholics have that non-Catholics will probably never understand, or at least will never even consider our beliefs even by delving further into our Catholic teachings. Reviewing all of the postings on this topic, I see that we are making little, if any, headway with our attempts to clarify our beliefs to non- Catholics. We appear to be at a standstill. As A Roman Catholic I believe in every point I made as I am taught from Scripture, and also from our Catholic Catechism. No one will ever change my mind, and unless some non-Catholics have an open mind, we will never be able to get them to understand why we believe in what we do. This is sad.

But it all boils down to how Jesus will view our beliefs and good works when we come before Him at the time of our judgment. I would rather believe what I believe, and if I’m wrong, what I do believe should not not be offensive to God. But I believe it would be offensive to God if I turn my back on what He is telling us by His Word as given to us in Scripture as further defined in our Catechism.

It all boils down to how our Lord considers what is in our hearts and why we favor one belief over another. I believe with all my heart and soul what I learn from God’s word and from our Catechism. My conscience is clear and I have absolutely no doubts as to the journey I am taking on my way to God’s Kingdom. THAT is why I am a Roman Catholic and THAT is why I shall remain a Roman Catholic.

May our Lord bless and enlighten you all in His ways.

Matthew 7:6
"Do not give what is holy to dogs, 4 or throw your pearls before swine, lest they trample them underfoot, and turn and tear you to pieces.

Matthew 7:15
9 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves.
16
By their fruits you will know them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?
17
Just so, every good tree bears good fruit, and a rotten tree bears bad fruit.
18
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit.
19
Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.
20
So by their fruits you will know them.
21
**"Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, 10 but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.
22
Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out demons in your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?’
23
Then I will declare to them solemnly, ‘I never knew you. 11 Depart from me, you evildoers.’
24
12 “Everyone who listens to these words of mine and acts on them will be like a wise man who built his house on rock.
25
The rain fell, the floods came, and the winds blew and buffeted the house. But it did not collapse; it had been set solidly on rock. **
26
****And everyone who listens to these words of mine but does not act on them will be like a fool **who built his house on sand.
27
The rain fell, the floods came, and the winds blew and buffeted the house. And it collapsed and was completely ruined.” **
28
13 When Jesus finished these words, the crowds were astonished at his teaching,
29
14 for he taught them as one having authority, and not as their scribes.

As much as I agree with you and scripture, and when compared to what has taken place over the last generation, I am of the opinion that non catholics, protestants and evil has taught their theologies to humanity by forfeit of the Catholic Church. Because many others may view these forums will be able to see for themselves that the Catholic Church has answered these heretical views and false teachings and is now showing up to expose these false teachings and new gospel teachings which are wolves clothed in sheeps clothing.

We are called once again to proclaim Christ Crucified in an age of death. The Catholic Church must not miss this opportune time to give witness again and never leave the evil one in a forfeit, but resist him always.

“As for me and my house we will serve the Lord” Amen

Peace be with you

 

[PJM]

=kristanl;5935533]So I was just reading the Westminister Confession of Faith, to see how I can talk to my friend who is Presbyterian better…
WELL… I came across this:

CHAPTER 29
Of the Lord’s Supper

. Our Lord Jesus, in the night wherein he was betrayed, instituted the sacrament of his body and blood, called the Lord’s Supper, to be observed in his church, unto the end of the world, for the perpetual remembrance of the sacrifice of himself in his death; the sealing all benefits thereof unto true believers, their spiritual nourishment and growth in him, their further engagement in and to all duties which they owe unto him; and, to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other, as members of his mystical body.

1. In this sacrament, Christ is not offered up to his Father; nor any real sacrifice made at all, for remission of sins of the quick or dead; but only a commemoration of that one offering up of himself, by himself, upon the cross, once for all: and a spiritual oblation of all possible praise unto God, for the same: so that the popish sacrifice of the mass (as they call it) is most abominably injurious to Christ’s one, only sacrifice, the alone propitiation for all the sins of his elect.

1. Private masses, or receiving this sacrament by a priest, or any other, alone; as likewise, the denial of the cup to the people, worshiping the elements, the lifting them up, or carrying them about, for adoration, and the reserving them for any pretended religious use; are all contrary to the nature of this sacrament, and to the institution of Christ.

Duh What the heck does a Catholic who [God willing is trying to share the Catholic Faith:shrug:] go to a Calvinist site to understand Catholic teaching? It’s unbelievable

"[Westminster Confession of Faith - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThe Westminster Confession of Faith is a Reformed confession of faith, in the Calvinist theological tradition. Although drawn up by the 1646 Westminster …/U]

The single truth resides within the CC, why would one go outside Her doctrine and dogmas for something one can ONLY find in the CC?

Completely confused Catholic!

Pat

 

[KathleenGee]

My word…Jesus is the Atonement for sin…He is the Paschal Lamb…I am trying to recall the words of the liturgy…pleasing sacrifice to the Lord…

Yes, I also agree with Gabriel 12 that the evil one is working with such willful denial and condensation. I cannot judge another person…but I also know they are jeopardizing their own souls with such attitude…

 

[KathleenGee]

Anyhoo…

Because our faith is based on the Apostles and reason, Catholicism is using common sense.

The Lord never intended His priesthood or rituals ever be abandoned. We all share in the royal Priesthood, but our calling is not to be a presbyter at the Mass.

How can one compare the Sacred Liturgy with a Bible service?

The rite of Baptism is a ritual, it is a Catholic ritual. The protestants use the same Baptismal rite to usher their followers into the Body of Christ and the Catholic Church!!!

People here should check out Hebrewcatholic.org…how the Jewish Catholics are connecting so many dots now with the symbol of the Church, and the fulfillment of Judaism in the Catholic Church.

The Lord did not abandon us to ourselves, and individual (lonely) way of looking at things and drawing this and that on whimsy or prejudice.

To believe in the Protestant Bible with 7 books removed by one man doesn’t make sense.

 

[KathleenGee]

I forgot to add…

When you are baptized into the Catholic Church, you receive a copy of your baptismal record, with your name, parents’ name, sponsors’ names, name of church and date.
Some churches have space on them for First Communion and Confirmation and Marriage sacraments.

Our sacramental records are binding. You can’t wash them off with a new baptism, and if anything, the former is simply a repeat and you are still by baptism in the Catholic church.

I know some girls who did…and all they got were photos of themselves with some sponsors…and the communion bread they keep out after everyone is done…is not clear how they dispose of the sacred memorial…

Not sensible.

 

[PJM]

=Timothy Piper;5957242]I don’t think you understand the OT versus quoted and what God said. Jesus always set the example, as the perfect leader that he is. The example he gave will never be contrary to His word nor was it; as the flesh and blood speaks of or symbolizes the sacrifice He would do on behalf of the called in Christ in just a short time from the time He instituted the ordinance, which is strictly spiritual and not literal as some presume in error. John 6:63 is a real good example between Jesus speaking in a metaphoric sense, but in verse 63 clarifying the manner, which was spiritual for the flesh profits nothing, in which He spoke. The unbelievers walked away because they took Him literally and the “called” stayed and understood as the apostle Peter clerly stated a few verses later. (You have the words of life)

Oh really
So friend you know more and know better than God Himself, the Apostles [Mt. 26:26-28, Mk. 14: 14-24, Lk. 22: 19-21, Paul 1 Cor. 11: 23-29. And then there is John Chapter six.

**The Apostles not only understood EXACTLY what was meant, but gave there very lifes for it! Jesus who by the way is God, did not call the ones who left back; quite the opposite He asked His Apostles if they too wished to not beleive and leave Him.

John.6 Verses 35 to 69[35] Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out. …The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, “I am the bread which came down from heaven.” They said, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, `I have come down from heaven’?” Jesus answered them, “Do not murmur among yourselves. [47] Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. [48] I am the bread of life. This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. [51] I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh." ** The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I [GOD] say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; 54] he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. [55] For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.** [56] **He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. [57] As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. [58] This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever." [59] Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” [61] But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, "Do you take offense at this? [62] Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before? [The Post Pentecost assention of Christ] [63] It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. [64] But there are some of you that do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that would betray him.

This is the actual meaning of verse 63:

Haydock’s Commentary: "The flesh profiteth nothing. Dead flesh, separated from the spirit, in the gross manner they supposed they were to eat his flesh, would profit nothing. Neither doth man’s flesh, that is to say, man’s natural and carnal apprehension, (which refuses to be subject to the spirit, and words of Christ) profit any thing. But it would be the height of blasphemy, to say the living flesh of Christ (which we receive in the blessed sacrament, with his spirit, that is, with his soul and divinity) profiteth nothing. For if Christ’s flesh had profited us nothing, he would never have taken flesh for us, nor died in the flesh for us. — Are spirit and life. By proposing to you a heavenly sacrament, in which you shall receive, in a wonderful manner, spirit, grace and life. These words sufficiently correct the gross and carnal imagination of these Capharnaites, that he meant to give them his body and blood to eat in a visible and bloody manner, as flesh, says St. Augustine,[3] but they do not imply a figurative or metaphorical presence only. The manner of Christ’s presence is spiritual and under the outward appearances of bread and wine; but yet he is there truly and really present, by a change of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of his body and blood, which truly and really become our spiritual food, and are truly and really received in the holy sacrament. —

***It is the Glorified, ***Risen Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ that Catholics are BLESSED to consume!

Oh ye of little faith and even less understanding! READ IT w/o youir own interpetation!

Love and prayers,

Pat

 

[Timothy_Piper]

Nope, sorry. The scriptures say we become new creations in Christ, not new “spiritual” creations in Christ. Since I cannot see the change, if I had the lack of faith of you, I would deny this Scriptural belief…



Ignatius says that he had no ‘taste’ (do you have to eat something to taste it ) for corruptible food. He desired the flesh of Jesus Christ.

Yes, you have shown this to be true.

I have shared truth with you. You can choose to reject it like those in John 6 did and walk away from the Lord but that is up to you. *so chose your path and in the end if you chose the correct one you will be in heaven, if not you will be in hell; like everyone. *

I will shake the dust from my sandals.

God bless you

You are confused; the people in John 6 that walked away are the people, like yourself, that believed Jesus spoke of literally eating Him, the true disciples understood what Jesus said in John 6:63 and satyed and even your beloved peter affirmed this. So it is you that are with the crowd that walked away in unbelief.

 

[Timothy_Piper]

Timothy Piper;5980623:

The earliest acts of the church and earliest church “fathers” are the writers of the Scripture inspired by the HS. They broke bread, not ate flesh. To be considered early, they would have to be the first 50-100 years after the death of the last writer and you will not find the eating of any flesh, you will see this emerge around 275 to 330 years after the death of John. So you can argue till your blue in the face, but ti will not change the words of the apostles or that of Jesus.

Gabriel of 12;
Again Timothy Piper you have missed the topic or are changing the discussion here; For one I was asking you for witnesses from Christendom that interprets John 6;… as you do today? You will never find any, that is why I stated your new christian theology and biblical interpretation is a New gospel teaching. If I were to show you from antiquity those from history who held to a view similar to yours today about a symbolic presence of Jesus, we would find your biblical interpretation condenmed and public made a heresy.

Here are some witnesses and ancient Christian documents that believe and taught my Catholic faith and died for this belief. I list them for reasonable minds.

“So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.” (2 Thes. 2:15)

“And what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” (2 Tim. 2:2)

THE BIBLE
“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.”

-1 Cor. 10:16-17

“For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, ‘This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.”

-1 Cor. 11:23-27

THE DIDACHE
The Didache or “The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles” is a manuscript which was used by 2nd century bishops and priests for the instruction of catechumens. Many early Christian writers have referenced it making this document relatively easy to date.

“Let no one eat and drink of your Eucharist but those baptized in the name of the Lord; to this, too the saying of the Lord is applicable: ‘Do not give to dogs what is sacred’”.

-Ch. 9:5

“On the Lord’s own day, assemble in common to break bread and offer thanks; but first confess your sins, so that your sacrifice may be pure. However, no one quarreling with his brother may join your meeting until they are reconciled; your sacrifice must not be defiled. For here we have the saying of the Lord: ‘In every place and time offer me a pure sacrifice; for I am a mighty King, says the Lord; and my name spreads terror among the nations.’”

-Ch 14

ST. CLEMENT OF ROME (Alt)
St. Clement was the third successor of Peter as Bishop of Rome; otherwise known as the third Pope.

“Since then these things are manifest to us, and we have looked into the depths of the divine knowledge, we ought to do in order all things which the Master commanded us to perform at appointed times. He commanded us to celebrate sacrifices and services, and that it should not be thoughtlessly or disorderly, but at fixed times and hours. He has Himself fixed by His supreme will the places and persons whom He desires for these celebrations, in order that all things may be done piously according to His good pleasure, and be acceptable to His will. So then those who offer their oblations at the appointed seasons are acceptable and blessed, but they follow the laws of the Master and do not sin. For to the high priest his proper ministrations are allotted, and to the priests the proper place has been appointed, and on Levites their proper services have been imposed. The layman is bound by the ordinances for the laity.”

Source: St. Clement, bishop of Rome, **80 A.D., **

to the Corinthians

“Our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who blamelessly and holily have offered its Sacrifices.”

Source: Letter to the Corinthians, [44,4]

CONT;

Go to Acts 2 to get the earliest and most accurate account or don’t; make no difference to me; I am able to discern the difference between spiritual teacings of Jesus using literal objects; not all are able to discern the Words of God; for this to is a gift without merit.

 

[wanner47]

You are confused; the people in John 6 that walked away are the people, like yourself, that believed Jesus spoke of literally eating Him, the true disciples understood what Jesus said in John 6:63 and satyed and even your beloved peter affirmed this. So it is you that are with the crowd that walked away in unbelief.

Well, you’re right, in a sense. The people that walked away were disturbed at the concept of literally eating Jesus’ flesh and blood – so much so that they couldn’t handle the Truth and walked away. The disciples were probably just as shocked but stayed, because, as Peter said, “To whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.”

 

[Timothy_Piper]

DEFENSE OF
THE REAL PRESENCE

Look at Holy Scripture: Jesus often used symbolic language; He used it to give a deeper, spiritual meaning to His words (not to confuse His listeners.). Cardinal Wiseman said that,

“Whenever our Lord’s hearers found difficulties, or raised objections to His words from taking them in their literal sense, while He intended them to be taken figuratively. His constant practice was to explain them instantly, in a figurative manner, even though no great error could result from their being misunderstood.”

An example of this was when Jesus said to his disciples, “Lazarus our friend sleepeth; but I go that I may wake him out of sleep.” His disciples then said, “Lord, if he sleepeth, he shall do well.” Jesus then said plainly, “Lazarus is dead.” Christ did not leave them with the misunderstanding that they expressed.

In another incident Jesus told Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, that “unless a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God.” Nicodemus then asked, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb, and be born again?”. Jesus then answered him precisely by telling him that a man must be “born again of water and the Holy Ghost.” Christ again corrects his misunderstanding.

At still another time, Jesus said to His disciples, “Take head and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” The disciples then thought that Jesus was talking about their taking no bread with them. Jesus, knowing what they were thinking, explained Himself and asked, “Why do you not understand that it was not concerning bread? I said to you, Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees” The disciples then understood that Jesus was talking about their doctrines.

In all these incidents Our Lord explained the meaning of His figurative speech even though taking His words literally would have caused no great harm. We know from this, most certainly, that where there would arise a misunderstanding that would cause harm, Our Lord would most definitely make things very clear to his listeners. We have just such an incident in the Gospel (John 6:48-72):

When Jesus was teaching in the synagogue, He told His listeners that: “The bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.” The Jews then, “strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

John 6:63
He is right for the most part, but for the sake of argument; Jesus did clearly explain His figurative language, you just won’t believe because it goes against what you were taught and what you used as examples above.

“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; ***the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.” *** Can’t be much simpler explanation than that; yet you do not believe it. What words could Jesus have said to convince you differently; He made it as short and sweet as one could.

 

[Timothy_Piper]

For those who have a problem with accepting the fact that the consecrated Host and Wine contains the Body and Blood of Jesus, whom they can not see since there is no change in substance, you might tell them the following : The Holy Spirit is one of the three persons in the Holy Trinity. These three persons are equal in that each of them represent the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit united as one. Each one is all three. Knowing this, you can believe that when you take the Consecrated bread and wine into your body, you are also consuming the Holy Spirit, who was sent down from Heaven to be with us.

Therefore, you are receiving the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit entering your body through the Consecrated bread and wine. They can not be separated. This is done through the Holy Spirit who is with us.

The Holy Spirit can not be seen, but is like the wind - you can not see the wind but you can feel its effect on you, and you know it is real. Thus, not seeing the actual body of Jesus in the Consecrated bread or wine does not mean that we are not receiving Him; but, actually, we are receiving Him through the Holy Spirit who, like the wind, can not be seen… Another example is when we breathe air. We can not see the air we breathe, but yet it is necessary for this air to enter our bodies allowing us to sustain life. Likewise, we can not see the Holy Spirit entering our body through the Consecrated bread and wine, but because of the words of Consecration, as given to us by Jesus Himself, the consecrated bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Jesus, who, I believe, enters our body through the invisible Holy Spirit.

So, if one says that the Body and Blood of Jesus can not be in the Consecrated bread and wine since there is no change in the substance received, you might say that Jesus is in this bread and wine, in the form of the Holy Spirit, who is invisible to us, as the air we breath is invisible to us. Jesus said, when breaking the bread , “Take; this is my body.” and when He took the cup said, “This is my blood”. When Jesus was resurrected, He sent the Holy Spirit down to be with us. In my humble opinion, I really and truly believe that the Holy Spirit, though invisible, becomes the Consecrated bread and Consecrated wine, and by doing so, Jesus enters our body when we consume either the Consecrated bread or Consecrated wine. This action makes it more feasible to understand as to how Jesus enters our body when we partake of Communion, without actually changing the substance as seen by us humans.

Recall that during Mass, the Priest says, while holding his hands over the hosts and wine: “Let your SPIRIT come upon these gifts to make them holy, so that they may become for us the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ”.

Jesus has two natures - human and divine. This divine nature of Jesus enters our body, through the Holy Spirit. Thus, the Holy Spirit, who is also the Father and the Son, through His divine nature, continues his mission to renew the hearts of Communion recipients."

Please know that the above is my opinion. I have given this a lot of thought and am using the common sense that our Lord gave me in my attempt to come up with a reasonable answer to those who question our belief in the Consecrated bread and wine. Whether I am right or wrong, I feel the above will especially help children who have questions on how this miracle can happen. Regardless of what I said above, any person of the Holy Trinity coming into our bodies through the Consecrated bread and wine will result in our bodies accepting the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as one. We are truly receiving the body and blood of Jesus by taking the consecrated bread and wine.

You still need to get past the “priesthood” and “the holy orders” before you can get to a consecrated “host”. this is why the ECF quotes used are not in their proper context as you make them out to be because before you can get to eating the flesh, you must prove the “levitical style” priesthood that Jesus did away with in the New Covenant, then you must show the ECF’s not only had priest, like those of your church, but the “holy orders” to "coomand God to come down…ever thought of that?

 

[Timothy_Piper]

---

Timothy Piper,

Ok., enough is enough. If for some reason I am wrong in my understanding of the Eucharist, (And I don’t believe that I am), then God will know what is in my heart and will also know that I have done nothing in this belief which would offend Him.

BUT, what if you are wrong in your understanding and refuse to believe what God has said in Scripture, which is His Word? Hmmmm, you should give that some serious thought. I believe if I were you I would continue to do everything you can to find out about the validity of your beliefs.

Please know that I have no qualms with you nor do I fault you for your beliefs, but I do believe you should seek further teachings on this subject so that when you come before Jesus at the end times, you will have an answer which may determine your eternal future.

I appreciate the heartfelt warning, but given you have to show so many things prior to getting to that consecrated bread and get past Jesus and Peter’s own words in john 6:63-69, I would give you the exact same advice.

 

[Deconi]

You still need to get past the “priesthood” and “the holy orders” before you can get to a consecrated “host”. this is why the ECF quotes used are not in their proper context as you make them out to be because before you can get to eating the flesh, you must prove the “levitical style” priesthood that Jesus did away with in the New Covenant, then you must show the ECF’s not only had priest, like those of your church, but the “holy orders” to "coomand God to come down…ever thought of that?

From Peter, through the ECFs, to toady, Catholics have ALWAYS received Holy Communion with the knowledge we still profess. That is, Christ present, complete and real, as He taught the Apostles who passed the Sacred Tradition down to us.

You seem to think we developed this understanding in the past decades!

The ECFs were all Catholics!..and you have to BE Catholic to UNDERSTAND the context and premise under which they ‘speak’!!

Your suggestion that their context in not understood by Catholics is,…well,…stupid or laughable; one or the other.