Communion of other faiths

[MarysRoses]

So says Catholic doctrine.

But others would disagree.

I am not personally insulted however I can understand how others could be insulted by your carte blanche “they are not.”

I’ve always been curious about something…

If a group believes that communion is only a symbol, and the bread and wine (or grape juice) remains bread and wine. How is it insulting when Catholics point out their elements remain bread and wine?

Um… isn’t that what they believe anyway?

Or do they expect that the Real Presence would be there even though they don’t believe it and argue against it?

MarysRoses

 

[Kitty_Chan]

MarysRoses

SyCarl made good points towards your question.

I would add a symbol represents something else. When one says ohh its justt a symboll, they are then judging the symbol meaningless.

When one sees a flag of their country, they feel something. When you see a eagle you feel something, they are symbols of something larger.

Even if its a symbol, it is associated with something larger, Christ. When you state its just bread and juice and someone defends that, its because they dont see it as bread and juice, because its something larger. Its bigger than the symbol. Thats why its insulting. One cannot forget the symbol is representing Christ.

And Im starting to figure from what SyCarl said (thanks) and what I believe that both sides, individually have differing views of it anyway.

You can have a catholic who “gets it” and one who does it as matter of course.

You can have a non catholic who does it as a matter of course and those who “get it” just like the catholics.

 

[MarysRoses]

MarysRoses

SyCarl made good points towards your question.

I would add a symbol represents something else. When one says ohh its justt a symboll, they are then judging the symbol meaningless.

When one sees a flag of their country, they feel something. When you see a eagle you feel something, they are symbols of something larger.

Even if its a symbol, it is associated with something larger, Christ. When you state its just bread and juice and someone defends that, its because they dont see it as bread and juice, because its something larger. Its bigger than the symbol. Thats why its insulting. One cannot forget the symbol is representing Christ.

And Im starting to figure from what SyCarl said (thanks) and what I believe that both sides, individually have differing views of it anyway.

You can have a catholic who “gets it” and one who does it as matter of course.

You can have a non catholic who does it as a matter of course and those who “get it” just like the catholics.

I think the point is, they don’t believe the elements become the true body and true blood of Jesus and spend time and energy defending their views, then when Catholics agree, they go and get all offended. It is sadly amusing. What they really want is for us to lose our faith that Jesus meant what he said and that those who have maintained that belief and the succession of the Apostles have a communion of the true Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. It all depends on what the meaning of the word is, is…

MarysRoses

 

[holy_wood]

I said has a more civil outlook. I said nothing of disrgarding the doctrine of his own church. Truth is you have as much right to condemn my faith as I have to condemn yours. Do I have the right?

Condemnation with support is the only valid kind. We Catholics use history to support our claims, do you? We condenm practices or doctrines foriegn to Christianity that are being taught as true. If you can find one written record before the reformation that adheres to every one of your beliefs and practices as a Christian I will consider converting.

I am offended that according to you everything I do in church is phony.

We Catholics all believe that your reverence for Christ is real but you simply do not follow the method of worship most pleasing to him and fulfilling for your soul. The fullness of the truth can only be found in his One True Church. For God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit to not have doctrinal disputes. The gospel and truth proclaimed in Heaven must not differ from the one found on Earth.

I’m sure Jmcrae believes that you believe that whatever you are recieving during your Churches communion, be it breador crackers or wine or grapejuice, holds hreat meaning to you. But the fact is that the idea of it being only a symbol has been completely foriegn to the Christian religion for more than one thousand-five hundred years.

---

I absolutely agree with this statement…

Who says you are right? You will tell me scripture, or the apostles, or Peter or Paul or gasp the Pope. So? Do not a million others who believe differently use the same “proof?” minus the Pope of course…

People read the Bible and believe it says nothing about the trinity or anything about Christ ever claiming himself God. So the question you should ask if your truly looking for the truth is why you believe your interpretation or beliefs are right and others are wrong (yes I know you never claimed that but logically speaking if you adhere to scripture you shouldn’t be luke warm on an issue of faith and morals, and assuming your not… you must believe that your belief is right and Catholics are wrong, otherwise you would be one).

So we should look at history. What did Christians in the first-ninth century believe? Because if you finds that your belief is new then its not true.(This relates only to religious dogma or doctrine)
I. Jesus’ Real Presence in the Eucharist

“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again.” *Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Smyrnaeans, 7,1 (c. A.D. 110). *(F.Y.I. Ignatius was the 3rd Bishop of Antioch and a 40 yr. deciple of the Apostle John…to think this guy got it wrong all these years, either John was a lousy teacher or Ignatius was a ****** student. Who would you listen to a 20th century pastor or a 1st century Bishop?)

“For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” *Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (c. A.D. 110-165). *

“[T]he bread over which thanks have been given is the body of their Lord, and the cup His blood…” *Irenaeus, Against Heresies, IV:18,4 (c. A.D. 200). *

“He acknowledged the cup (which is a part of the creation) as his own blood, from which he bedews our blood; and the bread (also a part of creation) he affirmed to be his own body, from which he gives increase to our bodies.” *Irenaeus, Against Heresies, V:2,2 (c. A.D. 200). *
“But what consistency is there in those who hold that the bread over which thanks have been given is the Body of their Lord, and the cup His Blood, if they do not acknowledge that He is the Son of the Creator of the world…” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, IV:18, 2 (c. A.D. 200).

check it out scripturecatholic.com/the_eucharist.html

 

[Kitty_Chan]

I think the point is, they don’t believe the elements become the true body and true blood of Jesus and spend time and energy defending their views, then when Catholics agree, they go and get all offended. It is sadly amusing. What they really want is for us to lose our faith that Jesus meant what he said and that those who have maintained that belief and the succession of the Apostles have a communion of the true Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. It all depends on what the meaning of the word is, is…

MarysRoses

I dont know maybe Im mixed up protestant who thinks like a catholic I just figured that if a symbol is strong then to that person it wouldnt matter if it was symbol or real and thats why one is offended.

And perhaps there are some that want you to lose faith but Im sure most dont, they probably are just thinking your wrong and concerned for you.

I am getting frusterated like I said in the other thread, and yea it depends on how everyone thinks of the meaning and it seems no one can agree, thats what I find sad.

 

[goodcatholicman]

This of course is the Catholic view which is not shared by Protestants. God is not constrained to operating only through those who have “Apostolic Succession.” I have full faith and confidence that God can and does provide all the benefits He intended for the sacrament to those who receive it in Protestant churches. Protestants, who treat communion as a sacrement, believe that Christ is present in a real way but how is a mystery.If that mystery is the real presence of Christ, then I don’t believe our accepting that Christ is present in some mysterious way affects what God actually works in the sacrament.

I have no doubt that Catholics will disagree with my view but it won’t affect my belief.

This is no doubt spoken by an Anglican or an Episcopalian. (I know I was one and am guilty of the same commentary) Our thoughts in regard to what the Catholic Church believes is accurate. Pope John Paul stated that attending Protestant service and accepting Communion is a GRAVE sin (one requiring absolution). We take the Eucharist VERY seriously. If you are troubled by our passion on the subject, try exploring the reasons why we are so passionate. Christ is really there in a REAL WAY in our Eucharist. It is so because Jesus said it was so. If we are right, then you must agree that our position deserves this type of passion.



To be deep in history is to cease to be protestant

 

[Dirk_Skene]

You’re a zealot and you do a disservice to your faith. …

John, all jmcrae & I are saying is that your ministers do not have the authority to consecrate the Eucharist. This is just a factual statement. Ranting and arguing will not change anything.

 

[jmcrae]

I dont know maybe Im mixed up protestant who thinks like a catholic I just figured that if a symbol is strong then to that person it wouldnt matter if it was symbol or real and thats why one is offended.

It matters whether it’s only symbolic or if it’s real, because if it’s real, then it’s a sin to throw the leftovers in the garbage or let kids eat them, which is what Protestants do.

But if it’s not real, then it’s a sin to reserve it in a Tabernacle and worship it as God, which is what Catholics do.

It seems very clear to me, when I read John 6 and I Corinthians 11, that Jesus wanted us to understand that it is really Him, and not just a symbol of Him. He uses phrases like “This is my body” and “This is my blood,” and he uses the word “chomp” when telling us that we must eat Him. St. Paul also makes a strong point of the fact that no one who is not in a state of grace should ever receive it, in case they would receive the condemnation of Christ in their bodies - how could a symbol ever do that to someone?

 

[SyCarl]

This is no doubt spoken by an Anglican or an Episcopalian. (I know I was one and am guilty of the same commentary) Our thoughts in regard to what the Catholic Church believes is accurate. Pope John Paul stated that attending Protestant service and accepting Communion is a GRAVE sin (one requiring absolution). We take the Eucharist VERY seriously. If you are troubled by our passion on the subject, try exploring the reasons why we are so passionate. Christ is really there in a REAL WAY in our Eucharist. It is so because Jesus said it was so. If we are right, then you must agree that our position deserves this type of passion.



To be deep in history is to cease to be protestant

I am actually a Presbyterian. While I know Catholics don’t agree, what I am saying is that I believe that Jesus is present in a real way, the actual form of His prescence being a mystery. whether the sacrament is administered by a Catholic priest or a Protestant minister. God is not constrained to act through the Catholic priesthood. He can act through whoever He wishes even if the minister may not understand what is happening…
We too take the sacrament very seriously. Quoting Catholic doctrine won’t change what I believe in this respect. So when Catholics tell me that we don’t have the fullness of the sacrament all I can do is smile because I have great faith that we do.

 

[ComradeAndrei]

So when Catholics tell me that we don’t have the fullness of the sacrament all I can do is smile because I have great faith that we do.

Well, then we smile right back because we know that you do not.

God is not “constrained” by the Catholic priesthood, He set up the Sacraments personally in this way. He chose a certain way that things would be done, no one has any authority to decide they can separate from this way and do everything their own way but hope that Christ has their back. Doesn’t work that way.

 

[Kitty_Chan]

jm

the original question was why was it offending, Im merely trying to show how the other would feel, its offending to denounce it as a symbol and therefore unimportant. Which simply is not accurate and thats why its offending. That is what Im trying to point out and the topic of the thread

---

My further to that is there is obviously a disagreement on the method of it. Look at the posts here, see the sides. Im on the unfortunate position to see both and its making me crazy. .:banghead:

 

[jmcrae]

I am actually a Presbyterian. While I know Catholics don’t agree, what I am saying is that I believe that Jesus is present in a real way, the actual form of His prescence being a mystery. whether the sacrament is administered by a Catholic priest or a Protestant minister. God is not constrained to act through the Catholic priesthood. He can act through whoever He wishes even if the minister may not understand what is happening…
We too take the sacrament very seriously. Quoting Catholic doctrine won’t change what I believe in this respect. So when Catholics tell me that we don’t have the fullness of the sacrament all I can do is smile because I have great faith that we do.

So, then, can anybody confect the Eucharist, in your view?

For example, if my mother or my sister decides that it would be a good idea to include the Eucharist at family prayer time, and provides bread and wine for this purpose, and speaks the words over them that we find in I Corinthians 11, is she capable of confecting the Eucharist? (Assume that she sincerely intends to do so.)

 

[Peregrino]

As a Christian, I really dislike it when the Eucharist becomes a tool of division and separation rather than unity.

I could put a host “validly consecrated” by a priest side by side with a host “consecrated” by jmcrae’s mother and/or sister and I couldn’t tell you the difference if you didn’t let me know who did the consecrating. IMHO others would also have this difficulty. It comes down to faith.

 

[goodcatholicman]

As a Christian, I really dislike it when the Eucharist becomes a tool of division and separation rather than unity.

I could put a host “validly consecrated” by a priest side by side with a host “consecrated” by jmcrae’s mother and/or sister and I couldn’t tell you the difference if you didn’t let me know who did the consecrating. IMHO others would also have this difficulty. It comes down to faith.

You are finally standing on firm footing here! It is precisely that the Eucharist is to be a unifying force that it is so important. When we take communion in your service there is simply nothing more profound that we can do to prove that “we believe what you believe” and our faith and your faith are intertwined. But the fact remains we don’t believe what you believe. So we can’t accept communion in your service. Try for a second to understand this basic fact. The Catholic Church IS THE CHURCH ORDAINED BY CHRIST. I know you disagree. But for a moment try to understant that this is what we believe. If that is true on any level then what we want is to SHARE that Eucharist with YOU! Now THAT is unifying!

 

[jmcrae]

The Catholic Church IS THE CHURCH ORDAINED BY CHRIST. I know you disagree. But for a moment try to understant that this is what we believe. If that is true on any level then what we want is to SHARE that Eucharist with YOU! Now THAT is unifying!

Yes, exactly!! But if people remain in their separated communities, then they aren’t in unity with us, and it is an insult to that very sign of unity to pretend there is a unity that does not actually exist.

 

[Ceil-1]

A fact is a fact, What do you expect people to do? Lie? Semper Fi put it very matter-of-factly. I’m begining to get suspicious about the intention of the OP.

 

[Kitty_Chan]

Whatever happened to Christ being the common ground? the reason for our unity? I find it odd that each side is honoring God by doing as He asked, but finding fault in how the other does it.

Its like two children, trying to do something nice for Dad, and the older one gets the drawing all neat, in the lines and full of colour. The younger one its not as neat, over the lines and less colour.

Does Dad love them both the same??

 

[goodcatholicman]

Whatever happened to Christ being the common ground? the reason for our unity? I find it odd that each side is honoring God by doing as He asked, but finding fault in how the other does it.

Its like two children, trying to do something nice for Dad, and the older one gets the drawing all neat, in the lines and full of colour. The younger one its not as neat, over the lines and less colour.

Does Dad love them both the same??

This thread has left it’s original purpose I think. The easiest way to look at it is this - Two people invited you to church with them. Both said Jesus himself would be there in the flesh. Which one would you attend? :juggle: Obviously the one where he is really present. How would you know?


To be deep in history is to cease to be protestant

 

[jmcrae]

Whatever happened to Christ being the common ground? the reason for our unity?

Wait a second - the Protestants left Christ’s Church, to start up their own little churches, because they didn’t like the rules, and didn’t want to follow them at all.

I find it odd that each side is honoring God by doing as He asked, but finding fault in how the other does it.

It’s debatable whether they are actually “doing as asked,” or just making up their own thing.

 

[Kitty_Chan]

big brothers . . . * sigh*