Eucharistic Miracle

[Luvtosew]

Yea, also wondering if Jesus meant that all who ate the manna died spiritually and went to Hell?

Yes they were starving so God gave them mamma for their physical bodies. Dont know where they went.

 

[Fragile]

Mamma?..hummama mama humamama!

 

[Anthony_V]

I also have a few questions, why does the Church disregard Matt, Mark(who wrote for Peter) and Lukes Last Supper.

You’d have to give me clear examples. I have no idea as to what you’re referring to. Perhaps you are referring to the fact that John isn’t a synoptic gospel, but Matthew, Mark, and Luke are.

In Exodus they were not allowed to drink the blood of the lamb.

Yes, because the purpose of the blood was to put it on the two doorposts of the house. In addition, drinking the blood of an animal is asking for diseases. They were instructed to eat the cooked flesh of the lamb with bitter herbs and unleavened bread.

[BIBLEDRB]Exodus 12:1-10[/BIBLEDRB]

Now did Jesus eat his own body at the Last Supper in John?

I’m having a hard time finding where you’re coming from. Are you referring to John 13:26?
[BIBLEDRB]John 13:26[/BIBLEDRB]

Also why do we think the body and blood are in the host when Jesus said the cup is his blood and the bread is his body amd aways that he will not drink from the fruit of the vine again till… can’t remember.

“Although his death will interrupt the table fellowship he has had with the disciples, Jesus confidently predicts his vindication by God and a new table fellowship with them at the banquet of the kingdom.” (from USCCB commentary, NAB)
[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 26:29[/BIBLEDRB]

Jesus is saying that his body and blood

Correct.

also Jesus said the manna sustained the body, but the bread he gives us is the bread of life( meaning spiritual).

Yes. Jesus is making a parallel between the manna from heaven (Exodus 16:4-35). He is saying "that bread helped keep their bodies alive when they were in the desert, but this bread will keep your spirits alive when you are in the desert).

also why take John literally and not the rest of the Bible.

I don’t understand what you’re referring to. Specifics please?

I believe in communion but not that it turns in flesh and blood… help me out here, been working on this issue for a long time, I read the Cathechism on it and all the reading, and still have a hard time.

Many cradle catholics like me were never told what T was, we thought we were taking it spiritually.

Maybe this tract will help you. The belief that Christ is present, body, blood, soul, and divinity, in the Eucharist is a belief of the early Church. For this reason, the Orthodox churches and the Catholic Church (the two oldest churches on the planet) both believe in transubstantiation.

 

[Fragile]

It is my understanding that while the Orthodox Church believes Christ is truly present, they do not put any definition such as transubstantiation on it, but leave it as a mystery.

 

[Anthony_V]

It is my understanding that while the Orthodox Church believes Christ is truly present, they do not put any definition such as transubstantiation on it, but leave it as a mystery.

My apologies. I should say “real presence” then. In any regards, they believe the same as the Catholic Church on the Eucharist, regardless of how definitive the doctrine itself might be explained.

 

[Fragile]

Then I wonder if the Orthodox impose a fast on it’s members prior to receiving communion?

 

[Anthony_V]

Then I wonder if the Orthodox impose a fast on it’s members prior to receiving communion?

They do.

So that the Body and Blood of our Lord may be the first thing to pass our lips on the day of communion, we abstain from all food and drink from the time that we retire (or midnight, whichever comes first) the night before. Married couples should abstain from sexual relations the night before communion.
  When communion is in the evening, as with Presanctified Liturgies during Lent, this fast should if possible be extended throughout the day until after communion. For those who cannot keep this discipline, a total fast beginning at noon is sometimes prescribed.

abbamoses.com/fasting.html

The discipline may change depending on what the bishop has prescribed.

 

[Fragile]

What are you people trying to say, the Church is always right?!

 

[mdcpensive1]

I also have a few questions, why does the Church disregard Matt, Mark(who wrote for Peter) and Lukes Last Supper.

In Exodus they were not allowed to drink the blood of the lamb.

Now did Jesus eat his own body at the Last Supper in John?

Also why do we think the body and blood are in the host when Jesus said the cup is his blood and the bread is his body amd aways that he will not drink from the fruit of the vine again till… can’t remember.

also Jesus said the manna sustained the body, but the bread he gives us is the bread of life( meaning spiritual).

also why take John literally and not the rest of the Bible.

I believe in communion but not that it turns in flesh and blood… help me out here, been working on this issue for a long time, I read the Cathechism on it and all the reading, and still have a hard time.

Many cradle catholics like me were never told what T was, we thought we were taking it spiritually.

First we have to understand that what we are consuming in the Eucharist is the “risen” body of Christ. It is truely the glorified version of what we will become in the future if we make it to heaven. The Eucharistic miracle talked about is the one at Laciano Italy. It has been determined that the host turned into real flesh so it was no longer “transubstantiated” but real. It was scientifically examined and it was true heart muscle with a particular blood type that was found (forget what type). This heart muscle has been saved and it has not deteriorated as regular flesh would. The interesting thing about this is that something like this happened I believe in Peru or Argentina and that flesh was compared to that at Laciano. It turned out that it was the same dna, blood type and biological markers. Interesting! Our Lord is very consistent and true to His word and heart

mdcpensive1

 

[paul_c]

What are you people trying to say, the Church is always right?!

yes, in fact. The Church IS always right when it teaches on Faith and Morals…

 

[GoldenLight]

I believe in communion but not that it turns in flesh and blood… help me out here, been working on this issue for a long time, I read the Cathechism on it and all the reading, and still have a hard time.

Many cradle catholics like me were never told what T was, we thought we were taking it spiritually.

Same here, this is the biggest stumbling block I am having on returning to the Church…

Now 50, I still remember before my First Communion our class totally not ‘getting it’ arguing with the Teacher about this, desperately trying to understand and in the end she shut us down… with “I’m telling you this is what happens, end of discussion”…

Since then until I stopped attending Church I always viewed it as ‘symbolic’ Now I’ve been told by forum members that this is a Mortal Sin…
On my journey back to the Church I today booked a confession (as it’s been 7 years) yet at the same time I’m thinking … ‘why even bother’ with Confession as I still wont be in a state of Grace due to my not accepting of transubstantiation…

I feel I’m caught between a rock and a hard place as the saying goes…

 

[Anthony_V]

Same here, this is the biggest stumbling block I am having on returning to the Church…

Now 50, I still remember before my First Communion our class totally not ‘getting it’ arguing with the Teacher about this, desperately trying to understand and in the end she shut us down… with “I’m telling you this is what happens, end of discussion”…

Since then until I stopped attending Church I always viewed it as ‘symbolic’ Now I’ve been told by forum members that this is a Mortal Sin…
On my journey back to the Church I today booked a confession (as it’s been 7 years) yet at the same time I’m thinking … ‘why even bother’ with Confession as I still wont be in a state of Grace due to my not accepting of transubstantiation…

I feel I’m caught between a rock and a hard place as the saying goes…

It’s quite alright. We’ve all been there before-- trying to understand this mystery; that’s precisely what it is, no matter how deeply we define it.
The significance of the Eucharist literally being Christ simply takes intimacy to a whole new level. You literally become a living tabernacle. It’s extremely sensual, and a love story. In fact, marital intimacy is merely a reflection of this relationship we have with Christ in the Eucharist. One would liken it the other way around, but intimacy is prioritized by God, not by us. When you understand this, it really upsets you further how sexuality is treated, and how young men like myself are encouraged to live. Its despicable, undignified, and it hinders us from understanding the beauty of loving Christ.

 

[Luvtosew]

Same here, this is the biggest stumbling block I am having on returning to the Church…

Now 50, I still remember before my First Communion our class totally not ‘getting it’ arguing with the Teacher about this, desperately trying to understand and in the end she shut us down… with “I’m telling you this is what happens, end of discussion”…

Since then until I stopped attending Church I always viewed it as ‘symbolic’ Now I’ve been told by forum members that this is a Mortal Sin…
On my journey back to the Church I today booked a confession (as it’s been 7 years) yet at the same time I’m thinking … ‘why even bother’ with Confession as I still wont be in a state of Grace due to my not accepting of transubstantiation…

I feel I’m caught between a rock and a hard place as the saying goes…

I’m in the same boat and of course haven’t received since hearing about the flesh and blood. I wish you well with your confession, I would bring this point up with the Priest,
and yes they say its a sin to receive and not believe, and well not sure what to do.

 

[Nita]

Same here, this is the biggest stumbling block I am having on returning to the Church…

Now 50, I still remember before my First Communion our class totally not ‘getting it’ arguing with the Teacher about this, desperately trying to understand and in the end she shut us down… with “I’m telling you this is what happens, end of discussion”…

Since then until I stopped attending Church I always viewed it as ‘symbolic’ Now I’ve been told by forum members that this is a Mortal Sin…
On my journey back to the Church I today booked a confession (as it’s been 7 years) yet at the same time I’m thinking … ‘why even bother’ with Confession as I still wont be in a state of Grace due to my not accepting of transubstantiation…

I feel I’m caught between a rock and a hard place as the saying goes…

It’s possible to “accept” transubstantiation without underderstanding it - which is what the apostles did when Jesus asked them if they also were going to leave Him.
John 6:60 Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” …6:67 Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you also wish to go away?” 6:68 Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life; 6:69 and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” The twelve had come to believe that Jesus was God and therefore His words were true – even if it was a “hard saying” that their minds and reasoning didn’t want to “listen to”, a hard saying that their minds and reasoning could not understand. But they accepted it because of who said it and His words were words of “eternal life”.

You can accept it in the same way.
Eg. “Jesus, it seems strange, unbelievable, impossible for me to understand, but because that is what You said and continue to say through Your Church, I’ll accept it as truth. Please help me gain at least a little understanding; help me to comprehend a Love so strong that You would not be satisfied with anything less than actually merging with me - not just with Your spirit (divinity and human soul) , but with Your whole incarnate Being (body also) .”

 

[grannymh]

I’ve heard this a few times, mostly by Rosalind Moss when defending the Catholic position on the Eucharist. About how God transformed the bread and wine into literal human flesh and blood for a doubting priest. I have a few problems w/this, firstly, this is supposed to be believed by faith, that Jesus is “sacramentally present”, secondly, in this case He is no longer “sacramentally present”, but “in the flesh”, if you will. Now we no longer have transubstantiation, but cannibalism!

The correct Catholic position is that this miracle is worthy of belief.

Cannibalism is not involved because the miracle was not intended to be consumed.

The point of the miracle is the demonstation of the power of God over the material aspects of bread and wine. This realization affirms that God is also powerful enough to become present under the material aspects of bread and wine.

 

[paul_c]

I’m in the same boat and of course haven’t received since hearing about the flesh and blood. I wish you well with your confession, I would bring this point up with the Priest,
and yes they say its a sin to receive and not believe, and well not sure what to do.

Its as simple as this. Jesus told us that the consecrated host IS his body and the consecrated wiee IS his blood. Now we all know that absent a rare eucharistic miracle, our senses can not detect that this is indeed the case. It looks like bread, smells like bread, tastes like bread and feels like bread. But yet Jesus has told us that once consecrated, the host IS his body. So the question is, “Do we Trust HIM?”

Now, sure, as God he could make the host turn physically into his flesh every time. But he doesn’t. He turns it into his flesh Spiritually every time but physically only very rarely. Why would that be? Perhaps because the true believer will accept it on faith. Remember in John 6, Jesus pronounced that you had to eat his body and drink his blood to be saved. This long preceeded the last supper, when he explained that this meant the eucharist, so those that heard the bread of life discourse had no clue as to what he meant at the time and most left him. In fact, it was only St. Peter and the Apostles who had faith enough in Jesus to trust that he would eventually make it clear how we could partake in eating His body and drink His blood. And indeed, now he has. The conserated bread and wine are INDEED, his body and blood for those that believe in Him and partaking of it worthily does indeed lead to eternal life. We can’t see, feel, touch or smell its Spiritual essence, but we know its there by Faith in Jesus, who indeed gave up his body and spilled his blood to save us. Similarly, we can’t see, feel, touch or smell God, but through Faith, we know he is there.

 

[grannymh]

Same here, this is the biggest stumbling block I am having on returning to the Church…

Now 50, I still remember before my First Communion our class totally not ‘getting it’ arguing with the Teacher about this, desperately trying to understand and in the end she shut us down… with “I’m telling you this is what happens, end of discussion”…

Since then until I stopped attending Church I always viewed it as ‘symbolic’ Now I’ve been told by forum members that this is a Mortal Sin…
On my journey back to the Church I today booked a confession (as it’s been 7 years) yet at the same time I’m thinking … ‘why even bother’ with Confession as I still wont be in a state of Grace due to my not accepting of transubstantiation…

I feel I’m caught between a rock and a hard place as the saying goes…

“Transubstantiation is not the problem.” What is necessary to believe is that God, as Pure Spirit, has the power to be fully present in any way He so chooses.

 

[Nita]

…I seriously doubt that any of you would eat and drink if it were to appear and taste like human flesh and blood!

If that is what would have happened at the Last Supper (institution of the Eucharist) and Jesus would have handed it to me and told me to eat it and drink it, I would have done so. And I would have continued to do it if that same miraculous phenoma would have taken place as His priests carried out His order to “Do this in memory of Me.” (cf. Luke 22:19)

 

[grannymh]

I would submit to you that He let them go because they were only interested in getting their belly’s full, they enjoyed the free lunch and now they wanted breakfast!

Anyway, I was not arguing for or against this doctrine, just the so called miracle.

Christ’s true presence in the Eucharist is the greatest miracle and needs to be believed as such.

You are free to argue against the miracle of Lanciano. This is not on the same level as the Gospel of John, Chapter six. However, the modern examination of the flesh and blood relics can be convincing.

 

[inkaneer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenLight
Same here, this is the biggest stumbling block I am having on returning to the Church…

Now 50, I still remember before my First Communion our class totally not ‘getting it’ arguing with the Teacher about this, desperately trying to understand and in the end she shut us down… with “I’m telling you this is what happens, end of discussion”…

Since then until I stopped attending Church I always viewed it as ‘symbolic’ Now I’ve been told by forum members that this is a Mortal Sin…
On my journey back to the Church I today booked a confession (as it’s been 7 years) yet at the same time I’m thinking … ‘why even bother’ with Confession as I still wont be in a state of Grace due to my not accepting of transubstantiation…

I feel I’m caught between a rock and a hard place as the saying goes…

I’m in the same boat and of course haven’t received since hearing about the flesh and blood. I wish you well with your confession, I would bring this point up with the Priest,
and yes they say its a sin to receive and not believe, and well not sure what to do.

Are your problems that of not understanding how it could be or are your problems that of not believing? It is a miracle and as such it is not understandable. It is to be accepted by faith. If your faith is such that you cannot accept that what you cannot understand then how can you accept God? If your protestantism is completely understandable that it requires no faith but only comprehension then your faith is no faith. For me it is simple. Jesus said it. I believe it. Nothing else needed.