Does God call people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist

[guanophore]

is there any other way to use symbolic, figurative speech ?

Yes, of course! Jesus did this all the time. The Kingdom of heaven is like…

But He did not say “this bread is like…”

Of course sometimes people do say afterwards, “figuratively speaking” .

Indeed not. On the contrary, we see the disciples of the Apostles teaching and living the Real Presence.

Of course sometimes people do say afterwards, “figuratively speaking” . While we don’t have that here, we also do not have “transubstantively speaking”, or "literally speaking’’.

It is a common evangelical error to equate “literal” with physical.

Did got say “let there be light” and was there “light”. Or was that “figurative”?

But I do agree, I am not a fan of the whole philosophy that underpins the thinking around “transubtantiation”, and I find it annoying. This kind of scholastic mentality came much later. But it does not change the fact that the Apostles taught Real Presence, and that their disciples believed it.

Their is the rub, the challenge, to see apostolic teaching thru tradition. The apostles never used the word “eucharist”, but do describe the original ceremony and tell of subsequent commemorations (Acts).

Can you show where the passages translated from the Greek “eucharist” are using a different word?

can you please cite any discourse "explanations’, beyond the simple “you must gnaw” ?

Yes, these are all preserved in Sacred Tradition. We have cited these for you repeatedly, but you cannot accept them.

In John 6, Jesus increasingly emphasized His teaching by using more and more literal and “chewing” language. He could have corrected them, as He did on other occasions, explaining to them that He meant His words “figuratively”, but He did not. He meant exactly what He said, and they walked away because He meant it literally. He let them walk away.

But yes, for sure anyone listening processed the words somehow, or made some mental decision on what He may have been saying.

Indeed. And it cannot be said that even the Apostles understood - perhaps not until the Disciples on the Road to Emmaus, and even after Pentecost.

 

[guanophore]

The difference was those who left could not receive His Words as bread from heaven, and thus, that He was from heaven and would somehow fulfill the means to feed them.

The manna was a type of Christ, who is the true manna! Jesus was born in Bethlehem, the House of Bread, and laid in the manger, a trough where grain is filled to feed.

Do you believe in all honesty that is exactly what Jesus personally instituted?

Yes. We believe that He ordained the 12 Apostles, and gave His fledgling Church the Holy Spirit, to lead them into all Truth. We believe that the HS led the Apostles to choose successors for themselves (Bishops), and that the Bishops chose elders (presbyters) to assist them in their duties. We believe that the valid Eucharist is that which is celebrated by the Bishop, or the one whom is so appointed by the Bishop.

Sorry rc, I have read through Titus twice now and do not see where there is any instruction that the elders appointed were the only ones allowed to serve the Last Supper remembrance, or that there is a lawful/unlawful Eucharist.

It is possible that the lawful Eucharist was restricted to Elders to prevent those that were not in unity with the Bishop. We can see this kind of rebellion already in the Letters of John.

It gives qualifications for elders and deacons but it is speculative as to their specific duties other than preaching.

There is no doubt that the role of the presbyter grew very quickly beyond the NT record.

Where do you see the Sacrament of Holy Orders?

Several places, but in the beginning, at the Last Supper.

 

[Benadam]

There is no greater calumny than which leads to death, even crucifixion, that actually led to eternal life, whether intended by the accusers or not. In fact the false disciples actually were desirous as Satan, that Christ would not suffer, but actually sit on a throne. Yet Christ himself says ,"The son of man MUST be lifted up ( on a cross) so to draw men to Him (for our eternal life)!

What Jesus said would only mean a calumny against His listeners if they enterpreted ‘eat my Flesh’ figuratively.

 

[mcq72]

What Jesus said would only mean a calumny against His listeners if they enterpreted ‘eat my Flesh’ figuratively

Well i took Fr. OBriens words to mean columny against Jesus, not his listeners…his listeners, including judas and other non believers would be guilty of inflicting columny against Jesus…leading to His death…leading to salvation for all due to His grace and forgiveness, even for his detractors and those responsible for His death…Fr. Obrien said this understanding makes no sense…it does apparently to me however.

 

[mcq72]

Yes, these are all preserved in Sacred Tradition. We have cited these for you repeatedly, but you cannot accept them.

No, you only cite words from the discourse, and they offer no explanation (that we have in hindsight…that might have helped those listening)
.
You continue to point out Jesus said nothing about figurative by way of explanation therefore it all must be literal, yet when we then say you are suggesting the eating His flesh is “physical” you say it is not, but an evangelical error in thought???

Please tell me did Jesus explain such error to His listeners in John 6?

Did He even hint of eating Him in an unbloody manner in John 6 ?

Did He give any explanation that we would eat Him thru the bread in John 6 ?

Did He explain it as any sort of a spiritual literal eating in John 6 ?

The explanation for figurative is not there, just as surely as it is not for any literal understanding…both these linguistic tools for understanding could not help any listener in John 6, as some on both sides of the aisle have admitted.

It is only in hindsight do we use such tools.

 

[mcq72]

Can you show where the passages translated from the Greek “eucharist” are using a different word?

No…is the word “eucharist” in the bible?

 

[mcq72]

But He did not say “this bread is like…”

Nor did He say, “This bread is literally…”

Or, “This only has the appearance of bread but its substance is now…”

Or, "I am like a true vine, like a good shepherd, like a door, like a path, like a lamb.

 

[Benadam]

Well i took Fr. OBriens words to mean columny against Jesus, not his listeners…

The meaning you give to Fr.OBrien’s words isn’t the meaning Fr OBrien gave his words. The only way his words can have the meaning you give them is if someone said to Jesus "eat my flesh’. That doesn’t make sense either.

Fr. Obrien said this understanding makes no sense…it does apparently to me however.

No offense intended but you haven’t made sense of the understanding Fr. OBrien said makes no sense. Does it make sense that Jesus would make a false and malicious statement about His listeners so as to injure their reputation? That’s what calumny is.

 

[mcq72]

On the contrary, we see the disciples of the Apostles teaching and living the Real Presence.

Yes, the disciples but not the apostles as found in their Writ…yes at some point in succession you have some teaching on real presence, even increasing with time, with some variation and development and even some discord, but with eventual conformity and decree/acceptance by majority (not that there was voting but that there was remnant of those disagreeing)

 

[Benadam]

The explanation for figurative is not there, just as surely as it is not for any literal understanding…both these linguistic tools for understanding could not help any listener in John 6, as some on both sides of the aisle have admitted.

It is only in hindsight do we use such tools.

Those linguistic tools were unnecessary because the Holy Spirit uses words the intended audience understands. Like the book of Revelation. We know that John’s audience understood the meaning of the words John used. Like the book of Genesis. We know the language the authors used was perfectly understandable to the intended audience.

Is it reasonable to conclude that Jesus is using language His intended audience couldn’t understand? They weren’t confused about what He meant. They were confused as to how it was true.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

I have always understood His purpose for coming was to die as a ransom for mankind.

I havce a couple of issues with that. Not that His coming would result in His death but the ransom part. Who was holding us ransom? Anyway. God is an eternal person and the Incarnation is God’s material presence on earth. God’s eternal material presence. God’s eternal Truth. God’s eternal gifts. Your conceptualization of these things prevent you from including the eternal nature of God to the Person of Jesus. So His Truth can be on earth in the beginning but lacking the eternal quality of who Truth is it can corrupt and not be eternal like Jesus who is Truth. Or His Bodies material presence on earth can’t be an eternal reality like Jesus is who is His Body.

Please consider that these things aren’t in there if you believe they are impossible. The Christ Event is eternity entering time and history. You believe your sins can be forgiven today even though Jesus forgave them 2000 years ago. You accept eternal qualities of the Incarnation but not fully.

Benham, I want to say this as nicely as I can. You say I don’t see Jesus as eternally God and that I don’t fully accept the eternal qualities of the Incarnation. I have no idea why you would say that and I resent it greatly because I don’t think you know that about me at all.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

Jesus has told us he is going to prepare a place for us so that we can come and be where he is. He never mentions coming back to Earth physically and materially after He ascends until His second coming. He never mentions that He would be physically present all over the world in as many locales as possible in the form of bread and wine stored in a Tabernacle made with human hands. He told us He is going to the Father and we should rejoice at that if we love Him. He explained on verse 25, " These things I have spoken unto you, being YET present with you. Then He promises that the Father will send the Comforter (Holy Spirit) who will abide with us forever, who makes the trusting heart His home.

Jesus’ material and local presence on earth is the same presence of His in Heaven. Where He is materially worshiped on earth becomes one with the worship of Him in heaven That happens only with a material presence on earth because it is tied to the mystery of Christ’s Hypostatic Union.

You aren’t refuting this. The gifts and promises of Christ in your post don’t compare to this gift.

He did say He would be physically present anywhere any time after He left. You just have to believe He meant what He said “This is my Body” and " Do this in remembrance of me"

For my benefit tell me where he said He would be physically present anywhere any time after He left. I am missing something.

 

[Benadam]

Benham, I want to say this as nicely as I can. You say I don’t see Jesus as eternally God and that I don’t fully accept the eternal qualities of the Incarnation. I have no idea why you would say that and I resent it greatly because I don’t think you know that about me at all.

I am very sorry that I offended you Wannano. As for accepting the eternal qualities, I should have said not understanding… In any case I regret saying anything that would offend you.

 

[Benadam]

For my benefit tell me where he said He would be physically present anywhere any time after He left. I am missing something.

If you take literally what He said when He said " This is my Body" His Body being the material extension of His soul, Then He is saying this Bread is a material extension of Me. Then when He said “Do this in memory of me” He is asking us to keep doing the same thing He is doing repeatedly with no command to ever stop. To do it perpetually. Jesus knowing the end rewsult of His command then would know that obedience to His command would enable Him to materially extend Himself wherever whenever His Apostles allowed. All these conclusions are based on believing Jesus meant what He said when He said 'This is my Body" Just a small step for a man but a giant leap for mankind. JK:grinning:

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

Benham, I want to say this as nicely as I can. You say I don’t see Jesus as eternally God and that I don’t fully accept the eternal qualities of the Incarnation. I have no idea why you would say that and I resent it greatly because I don’t think you know that about me at all.

I am very sorry that I offended you Wannano. As for accepting the eternal qualities, I should have said not understanding… In any case I regret saying anything that would offend you.

I do not mean to be easily offended, however, I have always understood Jesus to be eternally God. Not sure how you determine otherwise.

 

[Benadam]

I do not mean to be easily offended, however, I have always understood Jesus to be eternally God. Not sure how you determine otherwise.

Most things about eternal realities don’t come easy to those of us who live in a state that change is proper. In the Christ event eternity entered time and History. If you believe Jesus is Truth then Truth as a changeless reality entered time and human history. That means it’s like Him eternal and incorruptible. He mentions that when He said ’ the world may pass away but my words will never pass away. So the Truth once delivered will never pass away. His words were heard and they continued to be heard in the Apostles and they continue to be heard in those who the Apostles chose it to be heard. If this is Jesus word then it has the eternal quality to be preserved until He returns.
Wannano, just stuff like that.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

For my benefit tell me where he said He would be physically present anywhere any time after He left. I am missing something.

If you take literally what He said when He said " This is my Body" His Body being the material extension of His soul, Then He is saying this Bread is a material extension of Me. Then when He said “Do this in memory of me” He is asking us to keep doing the same thing He is doing repeatedly with no command to ever stop. To do it perpetually. Jesus knowing the end rewsult of His command then would know that obedience to His command would enable Him to materially extend Himself wherever whenever His Apostles allowed. All these conclusions are based on believing Jesus meant what He said when He said 'This is my Body" Just a small step for a man but a giant leap for mankind. JK:grinning:

It seems to me that Transubstantiation is a weak arguement for what is called the Real Presence.
Like you say, it is all predicated with the word “if.” To say Jesus becomes a host, a cracker or bread and then adore that host and bow down to it in the Tabernacle is more than a small step for me. Jesus warned about those who say “look, here is Christ or there He is”…

 

[Benadam]

t seems to me that Transubstantiation is a weak arguement for what is called the Real Presence.

Like you say, it is all predicated with the word “if.” To say Jesus becomes a host, a cracker or bread and then adore that host and bow down to it in the Tabernacle is more than a small step for me. Jesus warned about those who say “look, here is Christ or there He is”…

I don’t think adoring the bread as the problem, it’s no longer bread if. it’s the ‘if’ that’s the problem.‘If’ Jesus meant that. .Isn’t it the same conundrum as described in John 6?

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

t seems to me that Transubstantiation is a weak arguement for what is called the Real Presence.

Like you say, it is all predicated with the word “if.” To say Jesus becomes a host, a cracker or bread and then adore that host and bow down to it in the Tabernacle is more than a small step for me. Jesus warned about those who say “look, here is Christ or there He is”…

I don’t think adoring the bread as the problem, it’s no longer bread if. it’s the ‘if’ that’s the problem.‘If’ Jesus meant that. .Isn’t it the same conundrum as described in John 6?

I think maybe so!

 

[mcq72]

Who was holding us ransom? Anyway

Sin and death…gates of heaven were not quite open,leaving many in AbesBosom/ paradise

He led captivity captive