Does God call people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist

[mcq72]

a lawful Eucharist,

Reminds me of Paul and Corinthian epistle, where he ridicules division with tongue and cheek justification, to show who is right.

Sometimes there is carnal division, as in Corinth, covered up with a sense of rightness, to be declared (lawfullness being the ultimate declaration)…sometimes

We have many divisions in Protestantism, yet not sure we have declared a lawfullnees to communion views that would divide us (I might be able to participate in 28,000 of the 30,000 denominations’ communion?).

 

[mcq72]

But i must keep my own garments clean FIRST, or i will be cut off from the Bride myself! I must listen and follow the Lord as I am directed!

Amen rc…mean no disrespect, but sounds very “Lutheran”

Peace

 

[guanophore]

Do you really need us to go there?

apparently

upset at what is going on in swampy Washington

Anyone who is not upset does not grasp the principle of being salt and light in a dying world.

Did not know there is a biblical distinction between “called out ones” the church, and the body of Christ, those adopted by God.

I am not sure there needed to be one in biblical times. It really did not become an issue until ecclesial communities emerged that lack the four marks of the visible church. But the NT is clear that there are those that belong to God that only He knows.

Reminds me of Paul and Corinthian epistle, where he ridicules division with tongue and cheek justification, to show who is right.

It certainly is a clever way of setting aside his rebuke for the divisions and the fruit that comes from them.

 

[mcq72]

think that would depend upon one’s goals at the moment.

John 8:59 “So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple.”

John 12:36 “While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.” [ The Unbelief of the People ] When Jesus had said this, he departed and hid himself from them.

Yes,of course i thought of parables in the same vein you say here…just that we are all"friends" of the Lord, no longer swine, but worthy of pearls of intimate and open understanding…can’t get any more transparent than Calvary, to those that can see, otherwise a stumbling block as you might rightly suggest.

Not sure why many literally seeing the Incarnation/Calvary would then have to believe He resides where He can not be seen.

Again, counterintuitive to Incarnation, to the Son of Man being lifted up, openly, to see and be healed

 

[mcq72]

It certainly is a clever way of setting aside his rebuke for the divisions and the fruit that comes from them.

Well something is being set aside here for I clearly cite it …read it…per his own words…to be a rebuke…you don’t think birds of a feather flock together, that cliques see themselves as having it, relative to others ?

 

[rcwitness]

We have many divisions in Protestantism, yet not sure we have declared a lawfullnees to communion views that would divide us (I might be able to participate in 28,000 of the 30,000 denominations’ communion?).

Im sure you can. And what does that mean? That you have a common view of the Lord’s Supper with those 28k? Perhaps, but you still have significant division over what you claim Jesus to teach about Baptism, marriage/remarriage, same sex relationships, women as pastors, , contraception, etc.

We believe that if we have unity of Communion, then we have unity with what we accept and Teach about Jesus.

 

[Benadam]

Benadam:

Well, what we believe is, it turns into Jesus.

But what does that mean? How do you explain this in 21st century terms? We know that its molecular composition is the same before and after the consecration, so it does not change in chemical substance. Catholics disagree with those who believe that Jesus is united to the recipient in invisible spiritual form. Catholics disagree with those who would believe that the meaning and significance of the elements of Communion change. It is not just how they are “regarded” - this would imply a symbolic change and not necessarily a “real” change. (I think of the meaning attached to a national flag vs. a pile of colored fabric. The fabric doesn’t change, but the flag is regarded to have a different meaning than the cloth scraps that fell to the floor while sewing it.)
So what "real"ly changes?

I can give it a good layman’s try.
Any way it is conceptualized with words is going to fall way short. Even the doctrine of Transubstantiation can only be a model that points the mind but in no way is able to describe the mystery.

We speak of the substance. Sub=under stance= stand. Stand-under.This is the word used to conceptualize what stands under and supports what we know by our senses. Substance doesn’t submit to our senses. Just a word to conceptualize spiritual reality. Everything we know by our senses are referred to as accidents. The accidents don’t exist in of themselves, their existence is contingent on the support of what ‘stands under’ them.

The elements, molecules, everything we can sense, these are not the substance. these are the accidents, or just the 'outer appearance.

Something like the molecules of your body now, are not the same molecules of your body when you were an infant, but both, you now, and you then are you, so, your molecules, cells and organs are not substantially you but are your accidents .What is known of you by the senses are accidents but your substance is your soul. Both are essential to your being. That is an abstraction that the human mind can grasp, and only a model to conceptualize what isn’t sensible.

That being said, in a similar way the molecules of bread are accidents, or appearance of bread. The Consecration requires that the bread be as was blessed by Christ. Bread as Jesus blessed and broke. The proper words( faithful to the memory of Jesus words) and the proper person(in persona Christi) praying as Jesus did, calls the power of the Holy Spirit, as Jesus did, to change the sub-stance of bread into Jesus Christ in heaven… We believe that the substance has changed and the accidents remain. .

 

[rcwitness]

rcwitness:

There is the visible Church, with lawful leaders…Then, there is the body of faithful, who only God is able to declare on the Day

Did not know there is a biblical distinction between “called out ones” the church, and the body of Christ, those adopted by God.

Much more will be declared than just who believes on that Day

The visible Church is the establishment whom Jesus appointed through the Apostles, and they Lay Hands on those who will be lawful leaders. Baptism brings us into the grace of this body, yet tears in unity keep us divided from the visible unity. People and Sacraments are visible.

Jesus will judge us as individuals. He knows the heart and each persons culpability and genuineness.

He wont sit there and say, “This one was Catholic, he goes in. This one was never Baptized, she does not enter. This one was Mormon, he cannot enter. This one was Jewish, he gets in.”

The visible Church is what Paul describes in Ephesians 9
to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things; that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places. This was according to the eternal purpose which he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord

 

[Benadam]

The visible Church is the establishment whom Jesus appointed through the Apostles, and they Lay Hands on those who will be lawful leaders.

I’ve got a personal story that relates to this. I discussed with a couple of Pagans who said they were scholars. A spirit manifested to one of them and named it’self as one who was known to a pagan culture that worshiped him. It is a culture and spirit known to those familiar with that kind of history. I just can’t remember the spirit’s name or the culture. It was obscure to me. Anyway the spirit asked him for worship and what it was doing and intended to do. They wanted to worship the spirit but had to be sure it really was the spirit worshiped by the Pagan culture they knew through historical evidence. They were desperately searching for other Pagan worshipers that lived between the origin and today. They had found some. They wanted a continuous line of worship that could connect the spirit to the origin it claimed. To be sure it was who it claimed to be. I asked them, so you want a continuous tradition so you can know what the spirit would be like now. It wouldn’t be responding to the modern world as it was in those ancient times. I told them it was too bad their spirit didn’t operate through a continuous line of leaders of it’s religion transmitting it’s power by the laying on of hands so they would know what their spirit is doing in these modern times. They were impressed by the wisdom of the Catholic church.

 

[guanophore]

Well something is being set aside here for I clearly cite it …read it…per his own words…to be a rebuke…you don’t think birds of a feather flock together, that cliques see themselves as having it, relative to others ?

I do think so, but heresies and schisms seem much more serious than some snooty cliques. Here are some alternatives to your 'tongue in cheek" perspective. I note that none of them dismiss Paul’s words as lacking seriousness.

 

[sainteriksrose]

Because the Creator - ergo Lord and Master of ALL creation thereby matter - said so.

And this is a because He said so explanation, because this not only requires our belief in what happened, but that this is exactly what DID happen.

Remember when God commanded Moses to remove his sandals because he was standing on holy ground? Moses apparently did not perceive with his senses that the ground was holy therefore DIFFERENT THAN REGULAR GROUND, until GOD TOLD HIM THIS WAS THE CASE.

AND!!!

The bread and wine must ALSO be obedient to its Creator. It CAN NOT NOT DO OR BE… whatever He commands it to do, or be. Like Moses’ rod/serpent.

Matter is going to do or become, whatever its Master commands. Which is how creation came to be created BY our Creator, in the first place.

 

[mcq72]

I note that none of them dismiss Paul’s words as lacking seriousness.

Perhaps i need to use another term instead of one that can be misunderstood

Webster says it {tongue in cheek) is irony or insincerity, which fits when Paul writes that there is division amongst them, no doubt those that are right will standout as there own group.(no …they were all wrong in Corinth, and having divisions…all rebuked)

 

[mcq72]

Remember when God commanded Moses to remove his sandals because he was standing on holy ground? Moses apparently did not perceive with his senses that the ground was holy therefore DIFFERENT THAN REGULAR GROUND, until GOD TOLD HIM THIS WAS THE CASE.

Apparently some think the Eucharist to be holier than others. Some will not allow parishioners to touch the host, saved being placed on the tongue by the priest, and the cup is only for the priest.

A unique version of “take” in the “take ye and eat/drink” I think.

 

[rcwitness]

That would be an abuse of clergy to deny parishioners receiving Eucharist by hand.

I would contact the Bishop if a priest tried that to me or my children.

 

[mcq72]

That would be an abuse of clergy to deny parishioners receiving Eucharist by hand.

Yes perhaps now, after further decree, but apparently was common practice, by decree i think a while back.( before Vat II ?)…I am referencing a Melkite church in the area.

 

[mcq72]

The visible Church is the establishment whom Jesus appointed through the Apostles, and they Lay Hands on those who will be lawful leaders. Baptism brings us into the grace of this body,

Seems like a hierarchical institution is what it is all about, this Body of Christ…but thank you that we are not judged by what “card” we carry, save that it be stamped by the Blood, nor the rewards and jobs we have in heaven.

 

[rcwitness]

rcwitness:

The visible Church is the establishment whom Jesus appointed through the Apostles, and they Lay Hands on those who will be lawful leaders. Baptism brings us into the grace of this body,

Seems like a hierarchical institution is what it is all about, this Body of Christ…but thank you that we are not judged by what “card” we carry, save that it be stamped by the Blood, nor the rewards and jobs we have in heaven.

I dont understand what you are talking about

 

[rcwitness]

rcwitness:

That would be an abuse of clergy to deny parishioners receiving Eucharist by hand.

Yes perhaps now, after further decree, but apparently was common practice, by decree i think a while back.( before Vat II ?)…I am referencing a Melkite church in the area.

There are even modern Bishops trying to bring everyone to receive in this fashion.

I am opposed to the preference of these Bishops and their focus on gestures. We have way too many issues to deal with concerning the hearts of Catholics.

The reverence for the Eucharist must extend into the actions in our daily lives and when no one is looking at us. These Bishops should be focussed on what people are struggling with; how do we act irreverent towards the Holy Spirit!!!

 

[guanophore]

I am referencing a Melkite church in the area.

Melkite is an Eastern Rite and they distribute communion very differently than the Latins. They use a method of intinction, where the host is dipped into the cup

You can see at about 1:02 in this video.

Seems like a hierarchical institution is what it is all about, this Body of Christ

There are many aspects of the Church. Hierarchical structure is only one of them.

Marks of the Church | Loyola Press

Do you know the four marks of the Catholic Church? The marks are that it is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. Read more about the marks of the church.

www.loyolapress.com

 

[mcq72]

took a look thank you…amazing days we live in …the bible does say in the last days information will be flowing to and fro like never before…sounds very arabic