Eucharist (sensitive topic, discretion is advised)

  • Thread starter Thread starter iaskquestions
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

iaskquestions

Guest
Do you agree with this Catholic apologist’s views on the Eucharist? It’s John Martigioni, president of the Bible Christian Society.

(Note: The link below will ask you for your name and email address. It’s not some kind of authentication. If you don’t have privacy concerns, you can give your name and email address. Or else, just do this-

Name : abcd
Email : abcdefg@abc.com
👍

)

biblechristiansociety.com/download/mp3/marriage_and_the_eucharist.mp3

He is paralleling the receiving of the Eucharist with the sexual intercourse between a man and his wife. He says, “If someone asks you why Catholics don’t allow non-Catholics to recieve communion, simply tell them, "It is because we don’t believe in sex outside of marriage.”"

Please download the mp3, hear the whole thing and then comment.
 
I don’t need to listen to the mp3. A lot of times in scripture the Church is called the ‘bride of Christ’, and Revelation talks about ‘the marriage feast of the Lamb’ which, as Scott Hahn points out, has many parallels to the Eucharist.

And what happens when we receive Communion? Don’t we believe that we become literally one - in communion - with Christ? Aren’t husbands and wives also similarly described as ‘becoming one flesh’???

I think the analogy is apt.
 
LilyM said:
And what happens when we receive Communion? Don’t we believe that we become literally one - in communion - with Christ? Aren’t husbands and wives also similarly described as ‘becoming one flesh’???

I think the analogy is apt.
Click to expand...
That’s exactly my problem. According to me, the church is the bride of Christ and the marriage is yet to take place (as indicated in Revelation). So if we have not yet married Christ, then having sex would mean fornication.
 
iaskquestions said:
That’s exactly my problem. According to me, the church is the bride of Christ and the marriage is yet to take place (as indicated in Revelation). So if we have not yet married Christ, then having sex would mean fornication.
Click to expand...
Ephesians 5:25 - ‘Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loveD the Church and gave Himself up for her’. It’s a done deal, Paul’s comparison means we are already His bride.

Not all of Revelation was about future events only - the letters, for example, were to Churches that existed in John’s day and so were intended for that time, as well as future eras. As was the imagery of the beast - the seven hills refer to pagan Rome, which in John’s day was persecuting Christians, hence the whore of Babylon drinking the blood of the martyrs, and hence ‘666’, being a number which referred to Nero. As well as probably referring to events which are to come.
 
said:
If someone asks you why Catholics don’t allow non-Catholics to recieve communion, simply tell them, "It is because we don’t believe in sex outside of marriage
Click to expand...

.""

Please download the mp3, hear the whole thing and then comment.

there is a mystery of union here- intercourse is a reflection of this eucharistic union. i did not listen to the mp3, but there is no wrong in this when it is understood properly.
 
LilyM said:
Ephesians 5:25 - ‘Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loveD the Church and gave Himself up for her’. It’s a done deal, Paul’s comparison means we are already His bride.
Click to expand...
I’m always confused by the word “bride”. A bride may not always mean “wife”. A wife is someone who is married to a man. Normally, bride is used to refer to the unmarried woman on her wedding day, when she is about to marry.

So Lily, are you implying that our marriage with Christ has already taken place?
 
iaskquestions said:
I’m always confused by the word “bride”. A bride may not always mean “wife”. A wife is someone who is married to a man. Normally, bride is used to refer to the unmarried woman on her wedding day, when she is about to marry.

So Lily, are you implying that our marriage with Christ has already taken place?
Click to expand...
the answer is yes and no- we are betrothed, and the final consumation is death and enterance into heaven. even the Eucharist, as holy and immense as it is, is a sort of type for what is to come. this is not to say that what the Chruch says about the Eucharist is false, or limited, or anything of that nature, but we are too limited in our finiteness to fully comprehend and fully embrace Him. we must be transformed into His likeness before we can truly see Him. this betrothel is more than engagement and falls just short of marriage in its fullest sense. we are on the way to the bedchamber, carried in our lover’s arms, where we will embrace Him in the darkness of the grave and then rise with Him at the dawn of Glory. the mystery is in eternity, and so analogy falls short here and the timeline is erased. this union is the great mystery of the Love of God
 
iaskquestions said:
Do you agree with this Catholic apologist’s views on the Eucharist? It’s John Martigioni, president of the Bible Christian Society.

(Note: The link below will ask you for your name and email address. It’s not some kind of authentication. If you don’t have privacy concerns, you can give your name and email address. Or else, just do this-

Name : abcd
Email : abcdefg@abc.com
👍

)

biblechristiansociety.com/download/mp3/marriage_and_the_eucharist.mp3

He is paralleling the receiving of the Eucharist with the sexual intercourse between a man and his wife. He says, “If someone asks you why Catholics don’t allow non-Catholics to recieve communion, simply tell them, "It is because we don’t believe in sex outside of marriage.”"

Please download the mp3, hear the whole thing and then comment.
Click to expand...
Way over-the-top. Inappropriate imagery and diction. He’d be better served to give that up, fast.
 
Why don’t you email John and ask him to elaborate on what he said instead of asking us to scond guess him.
 
It might be better to say that the marital embrace is a dim reflection of what happend in the reception of the Eucharist.
 
The advisory for this thread is very timely, this is a very sensitive subject.

Too sensitive to be using terms like “intercourse” so loosely. I’m not even going to venture into the mp3.

Who knows what kind of mumbo jumbo is in there.

I have made a mistake coming to this thread.
It is very sensitive indeed to me…I will not come back to this thread and be the cause for anyone to make comments offensive to the Blessed Sacrament.

Aquiesce anima mea in Deus salus mea.
 
Comments offensive to the Blessed Sacrament? 🤷

I think people forget that intercourse is holy. Comparing the Eucharist with Marriage isn’t shocking; Scripture does the same:

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.
Ephesians 5:25
 
Hey I just want to say that I have listened to John’s talk several times. I think that the criticism is a little unfair. And those who have not heard the entire context of the teaching really don’t have anything to say. There is nothing unseemly or profaning the Eucharist at all. In fact my appreciation and understanding of both the Sacrament of the Eucharist and Marriage is much deeper.

The logic behind the comparissons of the two Sacraments helped me greatly understand the church’s teachings on birth control and sterilization among other things. He very clearly makes the analogy between husband and wife and Christ and His church.

It is also my understanding that it is along the same lines as Pope John Paul II’s teaching on Theology of the Body. And I was also just reading Pope Benedict XVI’s Sacramentum Caritatas and in part 1, #27, The Eucharist: a nuptual sacrament, he is saying basically the same thing.

Really, I think people need to give John a fair chance here. The mp3 download is free so there is no reason to knock him down without hearing it for yourself.

If anyone wants to ask for more details about the talk I’d be happy to listen to it again and quote it for you.
 
iaskquestions said:
Do you agree with this Catholic apologist’s views on the Eucharist? It’s John Martigioni, president of the Bible Christian Society.

(Note: The link below will ask you for your name and email address. It’s not some kind of authentication. If you don’t have privacy concerns, you can give your name and email address. Or else, just do this-

Name : abcd
Email : abcdefg@abc.com
👍

)

biblechristiansociety.com/download/mp3/marriage_and_the_eucharist.mp3

He is paralleling the receiving of the Eucharist with the sexual intercourse between a man and his wife. He says, “If someone asks you why Catholics don’t allow non-Catholics to recieve communion, simply tell them, "It is because we don’t believe in sex outside of marriage.”"

Please download the mp3, hear the whole thing and then comment.
Click to expand...
I’ve always liked this particular analogy.

Last week, I was reading little interviews from all the newly ordained men and they all said the same thing “I became a priest so I could celebrate the Eucharist”

I recall thinking at the time, "This is just like the young people who wink and say, “I got married for the sex”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top