Does God call people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist

[jcrichton]

Apparently one can have"life in them", that Jesus promised, by eating His flesh figuratively ( or another means yet not by transubstantiation).

So what you are intimating is that Jesus would have to capitulate to man’s determination to go it his own way?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[rcwitness]

We all do what? Profess that Jesus Teaches opposing things? Receive Communion through various self appointed leaders, or groups who set up their own rules which do not conform to the Apostolic Church?

We dont all do the same thing. Your prayer was great! But does praising God and thanking Him mean you are participating in the Body and Blood He gives the Church?

In part, yes, but when its patially, He is being divided and picked at. Eating some things, that taste good, but leaving other things which we dont care for.

Does anyone actually think if they met Jesus, He would not ask them to accept things which were opposed to their nature?

We think as men think, and try to manipulate Jesus! Peter tried to keep Him from His cross! And who would not have agreed with Peter? He was trying to protect his master. But we dont need to protect our Lord, He offers protection for us. And im a fashion which places us in harms way too! As sheep among wolves.

Do you not think that being in the Catholic Church doesnt cause me to shake with fear???

I am being made subject to every devil, and every abuse known! This is following Jesus! When we are close to Him, we get both the temptation and the wrath of His enemies!!

 

[jcrichton]

Nowhere besides the isolated sentence from Chapter 66 of The First Apology does Justin Martyr even come close to any indicator that he understood what was later termed transubstantiation.

Hi, Susan!

The problem is that when speaking to the quire one does not need to explain everything that deals with the choir over and over.

Further, you and others who reject Transubstantiation do so because you claim to have a better understanding than the Church’s 1500 years–when faced with historical accounts of Transubstantiation you (non-Catholics) reject what secular history shows:

Charge: Cannibalism
CAECILIUS THE PAGAN: You Christians are the worst breed ever to affect the world. You deserve every punishment you can get! Nobody likes you. It would be better if you and your Jesus had never been born. We hear that you are all cannibals–you eat the flesh of your children in your sacred meetings. (https://www.christianity.com/church...-early-christians-were-despised-11629610.html)
that Christians committed flagitia, scelera, and maleficia— “outrageous crimes”, “wickedness”, and “evil deeds”, specifically, cannibalism and incest (referred to as “Thyestian banquets” and “Oedipodean intercourse”)— due to their rumored practices of eating the “blood and body” of Christ and referring to each other as “brothers” and “sisters”.[14][15]:128 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire)

If you are a reasonable person, why would you believe that the accusation of “cannibalism” would arise from a “symbolic” eating of Jesus’ Flesh (common bread) and a symbolic drinking of Jesus’ Blood (wine/juice)?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

So if that characterizes who Constantine was, that is, unbaptized therefore not born again in the Catholc way, and He rejected God’s grace, why did the Church give him so much respect and involvement?

Wow!

Did you allow the current president of the US to represent you when he toured Europe and other places in the world?

Can you site those sources where the emperor was given authority over the Church?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

This seems to be confirming to me the suspicion I have been struggling with that learning from CAF is borderline useless. There appears to be a huge disconnect between what the CC actually teaches and what most adherents think it teaches and what they think they are practicing.

I fully concur. No site is an authoritative source–even the Vatican site is simply a means to dispense information… anyone visiting any site can take away the wrong information or even twist and misquote the material presented.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Yes I understand that mortal sins need confession to be forgiven. That is to be done before partaking of the Eucharist. If venial sins are washed by receiving how have I misunderstood? Surely if mortal sins are forgiven and venial sins are washed away…then my understanding is correct, no?

I think that you attributed automatic Salvation if one dies after Receiving the Holy Eucharist; a person who Receives unworthily (in mortal sin) only heaps upon him/herself damnation. By equating “Receiving” the Eucharist with automatic Salvation if one dies right afterwards you have compromised the Teaching and the Understanding of Breaking Bread.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Regardless of the development of “vocabulary” to explain what transpired in Scriptures, we find that Jesus did not hint in any way to a “symbolic” gathering to have a “symbolic supper” and to “symbolically” ‘eat my Flesh and drink my Blood.’

Now, if you can prove that Jesus was being symbolic when He stated that we must “chew” His Flesh and drink His Blood for His Flesh/Body is food indeed and His Blood is drink indeed, then you must assert that Jesus was as confused as those who blamed the Church of being cannibal for Drinking His Blood and Eating His Flesh.

So is Jesus Teaching in a confused metaphorical form or is He Teaching an actual partaking of His Body?:

23 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, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body, which is for[f] you. Do this in remembrance of me.”[g] 25 In the same way also he took 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.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. (1 Corinthians 11)

…and did you pick up when that eating and drinking of the Lord’s Body and Blood will cease?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

perhaps it takes a catholic eye to see that anytime His body is mentioned at communion it must mean literal, just as Reformers can see it as spiritual.

…but don’t they see it as symbolic (devoid of any actual value)?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

based upon what was “received” from the Reformers. So, yes, they are different rulings, and drastically different “gospels” that have occurred at different times.

…and based upon what was rejected from what they received from the “reformers;” in essence, they are the consummate protestants–protesting even their own founders and leadership (over 30K nuances of Luther’s schism).

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

There are only a few reformed rulings (symbolic, spiritual) and i believe both use same foundation,

(Writ and Catholic historical opinions/understandings).

We both use Writ and some tradition to come up with understanding/rulings. Reformers and her children do not forsake same foundation, do not forsake Writ, and opinions/understandings of some Catholic predecessors.

Reform children do not solely rule according to Luther, or Calvin, or Zwingli, just as Catholics do not rule solely on Augustine, or Aquinas, or Radbertus.

The problem is that they claim to base their “reforms” on Scriptures while in actuality it is more like on interpretation of Scriptures–otherwise the world would not have conceived over 30,000 definitions and counting.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Actually, i think he wrote those words at the behest of his lawyer and Counselor.

it is not all or nothing, either/or in regards to honoring ones foundation, and past, and predecessors.

The best in any of us gives honor to where honor is due, as graced to us by His discernment of all things

So Luther was lying through his teeth and perform a legal manipulation and massaging of egos?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

If you have the idea that we hold to a symbolic celebration of a symbol I can understand why you think we go against the teaching of Scriptures.

But isn’t that what most non-Catholics who do not discern the Body and Blood of Christ believe?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

…it is like the saying ‘were you there when they crucified my Lord?’

We can visualize being there but we were not; anyone who claims that their 20th, 19th, 18th… century founding of a body of Christians was initiated right before the Lord’s Supper… are they not stretching it?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[guanophore]

Allow me to write what I see could be my prayer at Communion. And please understand this is not meant to be polemic in any way.

My Jesus,

I believe that you are present in my life, my heart and soul.

I love you above all things,

Help me to serve you faithfully.

Forgive my sins and make me whole by your blood shed for even me.

Guide me through this life as I endeavor to walk in your footsteps.

Though I stray I thank you for never leaving me.

Amen.

This is beautiful Wannano!

I expect it is probably very similar to what most of my separated brethren do at communion, or at least I hope so! I wish that more Catholics would make this type of spiritual communion. I have heard that as many as 2/3 of persons claiming they are Catholic do not attend Mass regularly, and this causes them to drift gradually from the faith. Some can watch the Mass on TV and make this kind of spiritual communion, which also helps to bring awareness that we are all One Body.

With prayers like this, we leave it to the HS to work through and between us to bring about the unity in the One Church that He desires.

 

[guanophore]

…but don’t they see it as symbolic (devoid of any actual value)?

No, I think they see it as having spiritual value.

 

[guanophore]

So Luther was lying through his teeth and perform a legal manipulation and massaging of egos?

No, he was very scandalized by the idea of the Mass as a sacrificial celebration.

 

[MichaelP3]

Almost like the Catholic Church claiming to be THE VERY EXACT BODY CHRIST FOUNDED? Then yes. Stretching it very far and wide!

 

[jcrichton]

Wait, so you don’t believe Christ’s Word?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[MichaelP3]

Unless it is a fact that Catholic Church = THE CHRISTIAN Church.

Your confusement puzzles me. That has been discussed so many times on here. Whether you agree with me or not is irrelevant. But you surely should know what I mean???

PS. Don’t put words in other’s mouths. You definitely knew what I meant.

 

[jcrichton]

I did not know what you meant.

I suspect that you do not accept the reality of the 2000 plus Church history and that you believe that Scriptures only mean somewhat what they say.

Consider that there’s no government body that has existed for the same period as the Church (over 2000 years); that the Church has influenced and shaped the world we now hold; finally, consider that Christ stated that not even the gates of hades could overthrow His Church.

Only a revisionist can state that both the Catholic Church is not Christ’s Church and that Christ’s Word did not fail–then that person would insert what is “the Church” and what the Word of God “really meant.”

Maran atha!

Angel