Communion

[Reuben_J]

If the bread and wine are truly transformed into His body and blood, then aren’t we partaking in His flesh in the present, i.e. right now?

If that’s the case, then why does He frame communion in terms of “remembering” Him?

When we remember a loved one, we think about her or mostly we put up an occasion for the purpose.

Likewise everytime when we celebrate the Eucharist we do the remembering. However instead of just memory as we do for our loved one, we are privileged to receive Jesus’ real Body and Blood and to be in communion with him. I think that is not unreasonable and the Lord has the power to make it happens.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

The earth rotating on its axis once every 24 hours is proven by science it has nothing to do with faith.

When Jesus said this is my body he was using the bread because it was Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread so bread was one of the main staples for that meal and for every meal. Bread was given from God to Moses and his people while they were in the desert. Jesus has called himself the bread of life, but Jesus wasn’t really bread. He used bread because people and the disciples could relate to. It like saying in a meeting that this pen is the tower that is going to be built. He uses the pen as a symbol of the tower that is going to be build, but the pen is not really the tower. In the same way Jesus uses bread to symbolize his body but the bread is really not his body. Its something his disciples could relate to. And besided Jesus didn’t say he is present in the bread, he just said this is my body not this is my body that I will always be present in.

In a meeting I would say " this pen represents the tower." Christ did not say that the bread represented his body, he said it is my body. Also christ said that to have life we must eat his body and drink his blood. Can you give any thing other than when he gave us the Eucharist that would accomplish this.

ST Paul also tells us that those that eat and drink of it unworthly bring judgment upon themself that is why they are sick and die. how could just eating and drinking a mear symbole do such a thing?

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

The remembrace is that because we remember Christ we are to continue the Eucharist.

 

[rev_kevin]

In a meeting I would say " this pen represents the tower." Christ did not say that the bread represented his body, he said it is my body. Also christ said that to have life we must eat his body and drink his blood. Can you give any thing other than when he gave us the Eucharist that would accomplish this.

ST Paul also tells us that those that eat and drink of it unworthly bring judgment upon themself that is why they are sick and die. how could just eating and drinking a mear symbole do such a thing?

Ok you would say “represents” which is not what I said see, when I said that the pen is the tower I was using the words that Jesus used.

You must eat his body and drink his blood, meaning you must believe in him and accept him as your Lord and Savior. He who believes in him will not parish but have eternal life.

If you eat and drink of it unworthly, meaning if you have not confessed your sins you are unworthy. Now don’t stop there keep reading what Paul says about being unworthy. Also before you recieve the Eucharist you are going to say, “Lord I am not worthy to recieve you but only say the word that I shall be healed.” (or something very close to that) Now how do you know after saying that that you are worthy? How does saying that make you worthy? What if God don’t say the word and you still take the Eucharist, wouldn’t you be doing it unworthly?

Now I thought you said in post 7 and I quote, “I will not go into the same drown out fight over and over again that comes about on it not being literal but symbolic…”

 

[rev_kevin]

The remembrace is that because we remember Christ we are to continue the Eucharist.

Do this in remembrance of me. Here Jesus is telling us to remember him, Remember what he taught us, Remember why he came here. Remember his sacrifice. Remember his suffering. Remember he is our savior, Remember all he has done for us. Every time we have the Lord’s supper we are to remember these things.

 

[Barbkw]

For a full explanation of the Eucharist from the Catechism of the Catholic Church

usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2chpt1art3.shtml

ARTICLE 3

THE SACRAMENT OF THE EUCHARIST

1322-1419

 

[Barbkw]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1336

The first announcement of the Eucharist divided the disciples, just as the announcement of the Passion scandalized them: "This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?"160 The Eucharist and the Cross are stumbling blocks. It is the same mystery and it never ceases to be an occasion of division. “Will you also go away?”:161 the Lord’s question echoes through the ages, as a loving invitation to discover that only he has "the words of eternal life"162 and that to receive in faith the gift of his Eucharist is to receive the Lord himself.

160: John 6:60.

161: John 6:67.

162: John 6:68.

John 6:48 - 68

“Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died; this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die.”

“I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.”

The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?”

Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.

For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.

Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.

This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever."

These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.

Then many of his disciples who were listening said, **“This saying is hard; who can accept it?” **

Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this, he said to them,

“Does this shock you? What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe.”

Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him.

And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father.”

As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.

Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?”

Simon Peter answered him, "Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Ok you would say “represents” which is not what I said see, when I said that the pen is the tower I was using the words that Jesus used.

You must eat his body and drink his blood, meaning you must believe in him and accept him as your Lord and Savior. He who believes in him will not parish but have eternal life.

If you eat and drink of it unworthly, meaning if you have not confessed your sins you are unworthy. Now don’t stop there keep reading what Paul says about being unworthy. Also before you recieve the Eucharist you are going to say, “Lord I am not worthy to recieve you but only say the word that I shall be healed.” (or something very close to that) Now how do you know after saying that that you are worthy? How does saying that make you worthy? What if God don’t say the word and you still take the Eucharist, wouldn’t you be doing it unworthly?

Now I thought you said in post 7 and I quote, “I will not go into the same drown out fight over and over again that comes about on it not being literal but symbolic…”

You got me. I did say that you you and those that wish to see the Lords words as being mere symbols and not what he acutally said them to be … feel free.

 

[PJM]

Originally Posted by PLeeD
If the bread and wine are truly transformed into His body and blood, then aren’t we partaking in His flesh in the present, i.e. right now?

If that’s the case, then why does He frame communion in terms of “remembering” Him?

***Dear friend in Christ;

Allow me please to explain what eems unclear to you.

All of the following include he WORDS of Christ…“THIS IS…”***

**Matt. 26:26-28
Mark 14: 22-24
Luke 22:19-21
Paul 1 Cor. 11: 23-29

And John six say’s this…**[47] “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. [48] I am the bread of [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.” [53] So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I 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.” And friend this is precisely what takes place in Catholic holy Communion.

Hope this clarifies for you what you seemed not to understand?

The “remember Me part,” refers NOT to the person of Christ per say; rather to the sacrifice of Christ, which by the way is why Catholics have kept the image of Christ on the Cross; which we call the “Crucifix.”

 

[allenirvan]

If the bread and wine are truly transformed into His body and blood, then aren’t we partaking in His flesh in the present, i.e. right now?

If that’s the case, then why does He frame communion in terms of “remembering” Him?

The actual “remembering” part is pretty much the same for Catholics and everybody else, we remember the life he led and the death he overcame here on Earth. I think the real presence is a related but separate issue. Separate in that you can remember Jesus whether or not He is sacramentally present, related because, as another poster pointed out, the hebrew understanding would indicate a presence here and now as opposed to what our english word “remembrance” implies in the subject being already gone and a part of the past.

Why does he ask us to do this? Because this is the way he wants to be worshiped. Its the only thing he asked us to do for him…

The case for his real presence made in John 6 is multitudes ahead of the case against focused on the word “remembrance”.

Do you find yourself asking, “but this is a hard teaching, who can accept it”? vs. 60

Ask yourself the question Jesus asked the 12 who remained after all the rest of his disciples left, “You do not want to leave too, do you?” vs. 67

vs. 68-69 relate the correct answer…

 

[PJM]

Originally Posted by PLeeD
If the bread and wine are truly transformed into His body and blood, then aren’t we partaking in His flesh in the present, i.e. right now?

If that’s the case, then why does He frame communion in terms of “remembering” Him?

That was the understanding the multitude that deseretd Jesus as told by and look at the REPLY Jesus gave: **John 6: **

**41-43, 51-57 **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.

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?” ***[53] So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I 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. ***For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. ***

NOTICE didn’t call them back; did not modify His proclaimation. In fact at the end of the Chaper we see Jesus asking His Apostles: “Do YOU wish to LEAVE ME TOO?”

Those lacking Faith and proper understanding thought Jesus was speaking of His CARDINAL Body" NO! Jesus was spaking of HIS SOOM TO BE RESSURECTED AND GLORIFIED Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.
From the Douay Rheims Bible

Matthew 26: 26-28
And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.

MARK 14: 22-24
And whilst they were eating, Jesus took bread; and blessing, broke, and gave to them, and said: Take ye. This is my body. And having taken the chalice, giving thanks, he gave it to them. And they all drank of it. And he said to them: This is my blood of the new testament, ***which shall be shed for many.***Luke 22: 19-21

And taking bread, he gave thanks, and brake; and gave to them, saying: This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me. In like manner the chalice also, after he had supped, saying: This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood, which shall be shed for you.

God’s continued Blessing,
Pat

 

[mortonsam]

How do you know he is present?

Good point which totally begs the question: where does transubstantiation come from and how is it supported by Scripture? And too, assuming that it is an actual event, why would it even be necessary except for creating an exclusivity?

 

[CMatt25]

I don’t know, I have faith and believe he is present.

If we are honest with ourselves, that’s all any of us truly have regardless of where our beliefs fall on the religious spectrum. We might like to think we know everything. But indeed it’s all a matter of faith and belief when you get right down to it.

That’s why it’s called the Catholic faith. Or Orthodox faith. Lutheran faith. Methodist faith. Presbyterian faith. Baptist faith. SDA faith and so on. It’s all faith.

But all Christians. Professing Him Lord. United in Him Whom can break down walls. And Whom is more important than any differences we might have.

Add in our non-Christian friends. All part of the human race.

And God bless us all and peace.

 

[Reuben_J]

Good point which totally begs the question: where does transubstantiation come from and how is it supported by Scripture? And too, assuming that it is an actual event, why would it even be necessary except for creating an exclusivity?

Because Jesus said so himself? He said, “this is my body; this is my blood” as he lifted the bread and the wine. They still looked like bread and like wine, but Jesus said it was his body and his blood. There is no reason to doubt the Lord’s word.

Either we believe or we don’t; there is no reason not to believe that it was not an actual event.

Why it is necessary? I believe because it is important and the the Lord wants us to know and to partake as he wanted his disciples to do the same. It is necessary lest we forget; such is the human mind we need to be reminded again and again, we need to receive Jesus again and again.

 

[campeador]

Good point which totally begs the question: where does transubstantiation come from and how is it supported by Scripture? And too, assuming that it is an actual event, why would it even be necessary except for creating an exclusivity?

Indeed, it does create exclusivity!

As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him. (John 6:66)

 

[PJM]

Originally Posted by rev kevin
How do you know he is present?

Good point which totally begs the question: where does transubstantiation come from and how is it supported by Scripture? And too, assuming that it is an actual event, why would it even be necessary except for creating an exclusivity?

*** Dear friend in Christ; the “rev” kevin and I have had this discussion in the past. He still has not caught on; possibly because he is lacking sufficient Faith; [A GIFT from God] and it’s attachments, Wisdom, Knowledge and Understanding; also GIFTS of the Holy Spirit.***

2nd. Peter Chapter One verse 20-21 “First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. “

**2Pet.3: 16 **“peaking of this as he [PAUL] in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. “

Don’t get hung up on the term “transubstantiation ” which is a Theological term describing the process.

What is relevant to this conversation is that it is GOD HIMSELF making the proclamation. NOT just Once BUT FIVE TIMES!

Matt. 26:26-28, Mark 14: 22-24, Luke 22: 19-21, Paul 1 Cor. 11: 23-29 and this clearly articulated by Jesus Himself from **John Ch. 6: 41-43 ** “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.” AND 47-56 “ **Truly, truly, I say to you, [A Perfect God cannot lie, and cannot be accused of not knowing EXACTLY what He, God is saying] ** he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. 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 say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. ***He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him” [Which is a statement of fact that results from Catholic Holy Communion.

**Some of the WORDS of Consecration are "In Him [God, with Him [Jesus] and Through Him [The holy Spirit]. This miracle id from God. of God and for God; BUT we Catholics are the beneficheries! It is God who makes God present to us.
So here you have God’s own statement of the [SINGULAR TRUTH] supported by FIVE APOSTLES testimony. Opposing this is ONE verse; that too is not understood, and in fact is the same form of Ignorance displayed by the Jews: “How can he give us HIS flesh to eat?” [Go back and look again what GOD say’s in reply].

John 6:63 “It is the spirit [GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT] that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit [ME GOD] and life.

What is NOT understood is that Christ IS SPEAKING of His soon to be Risen and Glorified Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity! NOT HIS CARDINAL FLESH.

NOTE the following evidence:

1. When the multitude abandoned Jesus He did not call them back saying “opps I didn’t really mean ME”
2. Paul in 1 Cor. 11: 27-29 says anyone who eats the Sacred bread and Wine [NOW JESUS] does not belief this truth CONDEMS themselves!”
3. In the final verses of John 6, Jesus ask His apostles “DO YOU WISH TO LEAVE ME TOO?” The reply by proclaiming Him God!

May God grant you and the rev kevin HIS GIFTS of Faith!

Pat

 

[mortonsam]

Because Jesus said so himself? He said, “this is my body; this is my blood” as he lifted the bread and the wine. They still looked like bread and like wine, but Jesus said it was his body and his blood. There is no reason to doubt the Lord’s word.

Either we believe or we don’t; there is no reason not to believe that it was not an actual event.

Why it is necessary? I believe because it is important and the the Lord wants us to know and to partake as he wanted his disciples to do the same. It is necessary lest we forget; such is the human mind we need to be reminded again and again, we need to receive Jesus again and again.

I surely don’t wish to argue with you about this, but i really don’t think you listened to what I said.

I know that it is his flesh and blood because Scripture says so blatantly. My question is where does transubstantiation come from? Jesus obviously didn’t somehow physically change that bread and wine, he simply said that it is his body and blood. So then why can’t we simply trust that he is present when we do it in remembrance of him?

 

[mortonsam]

Indeed, it does create exclusivity!

As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him. (John 6:66)

Jesus created this exclusivity yes, but it is our job to include folks and bring them to Christ, not pretend like we are the Pharasees to decide who is worthy and who isn’t.

 

[PJM]

=mortonsam;7326189]I surely don’t wish to argue with you about this, but i really don’t think you listened to what I said.

I know that it is his flesh and blood because Scripture says so blatantly. My question is where does transubstantiation come from? Jesus obviously didn’t somehow physically change that bread and wine, he simply said that it is his body and blood. So then why can’t we simply trust that he is present when we do it in remembrance of him?

From Father Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary:

TRANSUBSTANTIATION
The complete change of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of Christ’s body and blood by a validly ordained priest during the consecration at Mass, so that only the accidents of bread and wine remain. While the faith behind the term itself was already believed in apostolic times, the term itself was a later development.*** With the Eastern Fathers before the sixth century, the favored expression was meta-ousiosis, “change of being”; the Latin tradition coined the word transubstantiatio, “change of substance,” which was incorporated into the creed of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. The Council of Trent, in defining the “wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the wine into the blood” of Christ, added “which conversion the Catholic Church calls transubstantiation”*** (Denzinger 1652). after transubstantiation, the accidents of bread and wine do not inhere in any subject or substance whatever. Yet they are not make-believe they are sustained in existence by divine power. (Etym. Latin trans-, so as to change + substantia, substance: transubstantio, change of substance.)

God Bless,
Pat

 

[PLeeD]

The case for his real presence made in John 6 is multitudes ahead of the case against focused on the word “remembrance”.

I don’t see it that way. In John 6, Jesus is already speaking figuratively by comparing himself to manna from heaven. He says "For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”

Jesus wasn’t bread when he came down from heaven to give life to the world. He came to the world as an infant human child. His speech is figurative.

Do you find yourself asking, “but this is a hard teaching, who can accept it”? vs. 60

Ask yourself the question Jesus asked the 12 who remained after all the rest of his disciples left, “You do not want to leave too, do you?” vs. 67

The problem with the point you try to make is that the Jews were grumbling about more than being told to eat flesh and drink blood.

The first thing they say in verse 42 is, “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I came down from heaven’?” This grumbling started the first time listed in the book of John that Jesus publicly claimed to have come from heaven.

So the “hard teaching” wasn’t solely concerning eating flesh and drinking blood. That wasn’t even the first point made that led to all the grumbling.

vs. 68-69 relate the correct answer…

Very truly I tell you, you are right that those verses lead to the path through the gates of heaven. It’s just that they don’t say anything to prove transubstantiation as true.

Caveat; it doesn’t bother me that some people believe transubstantiation is true. I simply don’t feel compelled, either by evidence of scripture, or through leading of the Holy Spirit, to believe it’s true. I could be wrong, but it’s not a salvation issue. One day I hope to know the truth.