Does God call people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist

  • Thread starter Thread starter rcwitness
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But that would be your own personal understanding/definition of “explicit” rule, would it not?

Since I’ve come across this same definition by those who claim that ‘there’s not visible church’ because “God is Spirit,” and ‘there’s no need for Baptism’ because “it is not found explicitly in Scriptures that one must be Baptized to be saved,” and there are tens of such pearls of “explicit rule” that they promote as sound doctrine.

You, my friend, are sousing “sola Scriptura” as a sound doctrine; here’s what we know about it:
The idea of sola scriptura is one that is very prevalent in Protestant denominations. Sola scriptura is the notion that scripture alone is the foundation of faith, and contains all revealed truth in Christianity. A common misconception that Protestants hold is that since Catholics do not believe in sola scriptura, we therefore do not know the bible, and do not promote the importance of reading and applying the teachings of sacred scripture to our lives. However, this understanding of Catholicism is not correct.
The teaching authority of the Catholic Church is obtained both from Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. Protestants tend to overlook the importance of Sacred Tradition in an effort to hold scripture as their sole basis of faith. Catholics do observe Sacred Scripture with high importance, as it is the inspired word of God. It is actually through the eyes of apostolic Tradition that scripture can be most fully understood, because they are so closely tied. The Second Vatican Council on Divine Revelation, says:
"Hence there exists a close connection and communication between sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. For both of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a unity and tend toward the same end.” (https://www.catholiccompany.com/content/What-the-Catholic-Church-Teaches-About-Sola-Scriptura.cfm)
Click to expand...
FYI, neither did Jesus nor the Apostles Teach “sola Scriptura.”

Maran atha!

Angel
 
You must have a different vocabulary tool box… so St. Paul is stating that discerning the real Body and Blood or Christ means symbolically linking themselves to the Lord’s Supper and His “spiritual” being?

Really?

…is that not like the take on “literally?”

Maran atha!

Angel
 
…again, when you separate yourself from the Teaching of the Apostles it is easy to make any claim and believe in them as whispers of the Holy Spirit; try as you might you cannot refuse the Succession of the Apostles and claim Revelation of the Holy Spirit as the course and means by which you come to Worship and Understand God.

Devoid of Apostolic Teaching you can only muster up personal interpretation an man’s traditions.

You can claim all that you wish to claim, yet, as the saying goes, “the proof is in the pudding.” (Translation: new recipes devoid of the original ingredients and instructions will yield new things not the original thing.)

Maran atha!

Angel
 
What you are stating is that what was said and practiced by the Apostles is not what Jesus intended; Jesus stated that whatever the Church bound/loosened would be bound/loosened in Heaven and you are redefining what Jesus’ intent was and what the Apostles Taught.

Hence, you are removing Scriptures from Scriptures and Apostolic Teaching from the Apostles.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
susanlo said:
Hmmm…do you believe that this passage is about literal sheep - 🐑 baaa baaa 🐑 - or is Jesus just using a metaphor?
Click to expand...
…could you be missing the point?:
16 I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. (St. John 10)
Click to expand...
Jesus is adamant that there’s but One Shepherd and that He Makes all sheep (yeah, even the baaa baaa ones) into One Fold: that His sheep Listen to Him; that there are thieves that will call out and confuse those that are not His sheep–these will eagerly follow any strange voice!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Wow, talk about mixing in genres.

Here’s a little scene, 1st Baptist, 2nd Baptist, non-de I, non-de II…, Evangelist, Methodist… and a whole bunch of others get together… behind the president of the US… everyone is welcomed to officiate in the name of God and country… but the Catholics are kept from even nearing the banquet table… so Jesus is present when there’s teaching about abortion as women’s health, homosexuality as an alternative, gender fluidity as a God-given right, and divorce and contraception as man’s needs being granted and graced by God… really?

Maran atha!

Angel
 
So Jesus Commanded that His Followers chew/gnaw on His symbolic flesh?

Maran atha!

Angel
 
…then it would not represent the non-Catholic “vision” of “revealed” in Scriptures.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Do you recall Arianism?

Since it was an Alexandrian Priest that subscribed to it (originated it), do you agree with him that Christ is not Divine?

Maran atha!

Angel
 
What they are inferring is that because they spoke as they understood, there was a definition in their minds and hearts not representative of the whole organic Church which would, as we find the various definitions, take shape and gain it’s finality as Doctrine and Vocabulary brings it to completion.

Origen was a salient figure in Church history yet due to his personal takes on some things some of his teachings (and his own persona) were deemed heretical. Do we then throw out everything that is related to Origen because he got mixed up?

Maran atha!

Angel
 
guanophore said:
in the realm of “Holy Mysteries
Click to expand...
…which most non-Catholics will quickly smear with, ‘yeah, Mystery, duh.’

If everything were to remain a mystery then there would be no need for the Lord’s Supper to Call for “do this” and it would be superfluous for Jesus’ Followers to Break Bread.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
…or we could use the diluted coffee theme: once there was a cup of coffee and four people divided it into four equal shares which eight people divided into equal shares which sixteen people divided into equal shares… then, to make it a full cup again, all they needed to do was add water–did anyone actually drink a cup of coffee?

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Except that the Mystery is Christ… as he states …the Mystery of Christ and the Church; do you not see that there’s a Mystery of God’s Functions included in this; what about of Hope, Hidden in Christ before the Creation of the world?–does St. Paul describe how this is or is it a Mystery?

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Since you and Susan are so keen in quoting St. Augustine, I thought I share some of excerpts that you have not posted:
ST. AUGUSTINE (c. 354 - 430 A.D.)
“That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God IS THE BODY OF CHRIST. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, IS THE BLOOD OF CHRIST. Through that bread and wine the Lord Christ willed to commend HIS BODY AND BLOOD, WHICH HE POURED OUT FOR US UNTO THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS.” (Sermons 227)
“The Lord Jesus wanted those whose eyes were held lest they should recognize him, to recognize Him in the breaking of the bread [Luke 24:16,30-35]. The faithful know what I am saying. They know Christ in the breaking of the bread. For not all bread, but only that which receives the blessing of Christ, BECOMES CHRIST’S BODY.” (Sermons 234:2)
“What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that THE BREAD IS THE BODY OF CHRIST AND THE CHALICE [WINE] THE BLOOD OF CHRIST.” (Sermons 272)
“How this [‘And he was carried in his own hands’] should be understood literally of David, we cannot discover; but we can discover how it is meant of Christ. FOR CHRIST WAS CARRIED IN HIS OWN HANDS, WHEN, REFERRING TO HIS OWN BODY, HE SAID: ‘THIS IS MY BODY.’ FOR HE CARRIED THAT BODY IN HIS HANDS.” (Psalms 33:1:10)
“Was not Christ IMMOLATED only once in His very Person? In the Sacrament, nevertheless, He is IMMOLATED for the people not only on every Easter Solemnity but on every day; and a man would not be lying if, when asked, he were to reply that Christ is being IMMOLATED.” (Letters 98:9) (http://biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num30.htm)
Click to expand...
Continued
 
Last edited:
Continued:
“Christ is both the Priest, OFFERING Himself, and Himself the Victim. He willed that the SACRAMENTAL SIGN of this should be the daily Sacrifice of the Church, who, since the Church is His body and He the Head, learns to OFFER herself through Him.” (City of God 10:20)
“By those sacrifices of the Old Law, this one Sacrifice is signified, in which there is a true remission of sins; but not only is no one forbidden to take as food the Blood of this Sacrifice, rather, all who wish to possess life are exhorted to drink thereof.” (Questions on the Heptateuch 3:57)
“Nor can it be denied that the souls of the dead find relief through the piety of their friends and relatives who are still alive, when the Sacrifice of the Mediator is OFFERED for them, or when alms are given in the church.” (Ench Faith, Hope, Love 29:110)
“But by the prayers of the Holy Church, and by the SALVIFIC SACRIFICE, and by the alms which are given for their spirits, there is no doubt that the dead are aided that the Lord might deal more mercifully with them than their sins would deserve. FOR THE WHOLE CHURCH OBSERVES THIS PRACTICE WHICH WAS HANDED DOWN BY THE FATHERS that it prays for those who have died in the communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, when they are commemorated in their own place in the Sacrifice itself; and the Sacrifice is OFFERED also in memory of them, on their behalf. If, the works of mercy are celebrated for the sake of those who are being remembered, who would hesitate to recommend them, on whose behalf prayers to God are not offered in vain? It is not at all to be doubted that such prayers are of profit to the dead; but for such of them as lived before their death in a way that makes it possible for these things to be useful to them after death.” (Sermons 172:2)
“…I turn to Christ, because it is He whom I seek here; and I discover how the earth is adored without impiety, how without impiety the footstool of His feet is adored. For He received earth from earth; because flesh is from the earth, and He took flesh from the flesh of Mary. He walked here in the same flesh, AND GAVE US THE SAME FLESH TO BE EATEN UNTO SALVATION. BUT NO ONE EATS THAT FLESH UNLESS FIRST HE ADORES IT; and thus it is discovered how such a footstool of the Lord’s feet is adored; AND NOT ONLY DO WE NOT SIN BY ADORING, WE DO SIN BY NOT ADORING.” (Psalms 98:9) (http://biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num30.htm)
Click to expand...
Maran atha!

Angel
 
It is characteristic of non-Catholic quoting Catholic sources… they quote from what they have learned (interpreted) of what it means not from actually studying and accepting the whole of the teachings… otherwise they would be hard-pressed to accept that St. Augustine also referenced the Holy Eucharist as means to help out the souls in Purgatory… they will not open that can of worms!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Last edited:
…not much; because it is the definition that is being presented… much like those movies that insinuate that God rejects Believers and uses evil to bring about good… the connection that is being made is what actually makes for the vehicle to convict people that one thing or another is the correct/right thing… I watch and study simultaneously… ever noticed how Catholics are only portrayed as murderers, etc. in movies; even in “wholesome” shows as ‘Blue Blood’ Catholics are only portrayed in a diminished and compromised characterization.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top