How many deny Jesus Christ in the Eucharist?

[KathleenGee]

The Eucharist has always been the summit of Christian faith. The fundamentalists take the bible literally, except the words of Our Lord at the Last Supper, after He had already given reference to this event beforehand with some followers leaving Him, thinking He was calling them to cannibalism.

I see Fundamentalism the same as those who left Him before the Last Supper. The great heresy of the early Christians was to deny the Divine Presence in the Eucharist.

 

[rev_kevin]

Well not really. Baptism is when we become members of the mystical Body of Christ, the Church. Babies are not in a position to accept Christ, but we baptize them all the same because they are also called be members of the Mystical Body of Christ.

Thats the definition.
Now from what I have been told on the CAF by other members, the reason the CC baptizes infants is because it washes away original sin. I have been told that infants can believe and they know who Christ is.
When you are baptized you believe and accept Christ into your heart. Christ is the church and we have the church, Christ, living in us. You see the church as the CC or the church that Jesus started. Christ is the church, not a man named church like the Catholic, Baptist, or any other name. Its Christ and Christ alone who is the church. We are extensions of his church, Catholic, Baptist and the others.

 

[Nicea325]

Thats the definition.
Now from what I have been told on the CAF by other members, the reason the CC baptizes infants is because it washes away original sin. I have been told that infants can believe and they know who Christ is.
When you are baptized you believe and accept Christ into your heart. Christ is the church and we have the church, Christ, living in us. You see the church as the CC or the church that Jesus started. Christ is the church, not a man named church like the Catholic, Baptist, or any other name. Its Christ and Christ alone who is the church. We are extensions of his church, Catholic, Baptist and the others.

Its Christ and Christ alone who is the church. We are extensions of his church, Catholic, Baptist and the others

Aaahhhh…I am not in agreement with that specific sentence. Christ Body is ONE,not individual extensions (different churches) of His Body (ONE) all teaching different things. Sorry,but that is not what Christ left or the type of church he founded.

 

[benedictus2]

Good question.

In science, the thinkers of the past were wrong about many many things for thousands of years. Is this not possible in faith?

That is science. Christ did not promise the guidance of the Holy Spirit in matters of science

 

[larkin31]

That is science. Christ did not promise the guidance of the Holy Spirit in matters of science

So, humans don’t err in matters of faith? I asked a fairly direct question.

 

[benedictus2]

That may be true. I have often encountered people who argue that different denominations are a good thing. On a certain level, this is true only inasmuch as it can help us to recognize truth from error. For example, if a group from within Roman Catholicism were teaching, say, Mormon doctrine on the Trinity, but stayed within Rome, it would lead to a lot more confusion among Roman Catholics than if Mormons were a completely different group, which they are. So there will always be separation along doctrinal lines. This was true almost within a generation from Pentecost.

  This argument does not hold water.  There are currently cafeteria Catholics who spout all sorts of un-Christian doctrines who remain in the Church. And the reason for their remaining is so that they can get the church to change her doctrine. So they are working towards her ruin much like termites.

However, that is nothing new. Up and down the centuries, heresies have arisen and most of them if not all, were started by priests and bishops. But the Church has always condemned these heresies.

The matter at issue now is nothing new. As I have posted earlier, Berengarius of Tours in the 11th century made the same claim you are doing now. And even then it was condemned…

And the reason Berengarius never gained ground was because he was in the Church and the Church could sanction and condemn his heresy. Unlike now in the protestant realm where everyone believes what ever they want to believe and someone’s belief does not gel with the current church, they just start their own.

On a greater level, however, denominations are not a good thing in that Christ calls us toward unity in the faith. Although, I believe Christ’s high priestly prayer in John 17 is speaking of ontological unity among Christians (“that they may be one, even as you and I are one”).

Amen!

False teaching, though, is false, even if the church body is orthodox on the vast majority of teaching.

But who decides which is false and which is true?

So no, I don’t believe the Holy Spirit has led churches with false teachings to those conclusions.

If not the Holy Spirit then who?

This isn’t to deny that the Spirit is still at work within them.

And that is true. The Holy Spirit will still be at work in them but matters of doctrine is another thing.

And we have seen this in a lot of conversion stories where the Holy Spirit worked and continues to work towards their return to the Church.

The reason for my response to your comment is because that accusation is often made, but I have seen very little evidence to support the hypothesis that we believe the Spirit is leading people to multiple truths.

That conclusion cannot be avoided if you maintain that differing denominations with differing beliefs all hold the truth.

One way or another, we have to ask the question, which of these is really true.

 

[PRmerger]

So, humans don’t err in matters of faith? I asked a fairly direct question.

Larkin!! What’s going on with your discourse here on the CAFs??? It seems like you’re turning into the phantom poster: hitting a thread with a question and then leaving ne’er to discuss and follow up.

<sad!> :crying:

 

[benedictus2]

A concern of mine over the years has been the impact of paganism and pagan religions upon Christianity once it expanded into the Greco-Roman world. I’ve always been concerned that communion is an area susceptible to pagan influence and can’t help but wonder if that influence didn’t make its impact. To believe in the ‘real presence’ of Christ is no problem. “Lo, I am with you always…” But to believe that the bread and wine change in substance once the priest offers the prayer of consecration - well, I find that in conflict with reason.

It may be in conflict with man’s own piddly little brain from which man’s reason comes but not when you think that Christ IS GOD and can do anything.

  And we hold this belief because Christ said so.  Those who do not believe this to be so do not believe in Christ because He is the one who said that the bread is His Body and the wine is His blood.

I know, I know. Miracles and all that. But I have expressed my honest doubt here. As for Christ’s words, he spoke in metaphors and similes and parables all the time.

And if you have been following the thread, that kind of reasoning has been refuted many times. When Jesus spoke in metaphors, the disciples understood it to be such. That they had a major issues with this doctrine shows you that they understood it clearly. That is why they walked away.

I saw a study not long ago that a majority of American Catholics don’t believe in transubstantiaion either. So, I’m not alone in this.

Which really has not bearing on the discussion. Many Catholics commit abortion, practice contraception, practice homosexual sex. So what has that got to do with whether this doctrine is true or not?

I believe that millions have quietly left the church because they simply and honestly cannot believe what they find to be unbelievable.

Nope. The people who have left the Church do not leave because they do not believe in transubstantiation. They leave because of the strict moral guidelines of the Catholic church. They when they leave they concoct this story that they left because they don’t believe in the Real Presence. It all has to do with morality. They want to commit sin and not want to feel guilty committing it.

Millions of others remain in the church for a variety of reasons who also don’t accept this and other teachings. I guess these are what are called cafeteria Catholics.

That is true, tepidity marks the Church today. But that is changing.

What should be done with them? In the ‘good old days’ they could be tried and executed for heresy, but here in America that not an option.

The solution is good solid Catechism. Which most unfortunately is something that has been left by the wayside by a lot of priests and religious.
I mean, take our parish for example. Yesterday on the feast of Pentecost, there on the take away sheet the include an excerpt from Marianne Williamson of all people!!

The church should admire and admit people who can’t sincerely subscribe to all those teachings. Did Padre Pio really bilocal and levitate? Hm!

Admire? What is there to admire about self-deification. Because in the end that is all what it boils down to. I/Me/Myself am the sole arbiter of truth. So therefore what I believe to be true must be so.

What the Chruch should do is get people truly Catechized. And if after that they persist in following the pied piper of lies, then really that is their free choice.

 

[benedictus2]

So, humans don’t err in matters of faith? I asked a fairly direct question.

And I gave the right answer to put your question in it’s proper perspective. Your use of terminilogies get fuzzy sometimes and your understanding of what we mean tend to get askew.

So to this new question. Not when they have been given the promise of the guidance of the Holy Sprit. That is why the church does not make pronouncements willy nilly. When something cannot be definitively declared a dogman, she doesn’t.

 

[benedictus2]

Larkin!! What’s going on with your discourse here on the CAFs??? It seems like you’re turning into the phantom poster: hitting a thread with a question and then leaving ne’er to discuss and follow up.

<sad!> :crying:

He’s afraid of proper debate. Perhaps because he knows he’s standing on shaky ground

 

[KathleenGee]

Regarding infant baptism, this practice was done by entire households during the Apostolic era of Acts in Scripture and has continued in the Church’s 2000 year old history.

Baptism incorporates the human being into the Body of Christ.

 

[benedictus2]

The Lord Jesus Christ is physically in Heaven at this time until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. See (Hebrews 1:3) He is not physically locked up inside any tabernacle made by man.

Hmmm, you know what, for a someone who calls himself a Christian, you perception of reality is decidedly materialistic.
Jesus is God, He is capable of being wherever He wants to be. If He said the bread is His body then it is so, because He said so. It seems to be you doubt His power to do what ever He says.

Such a belief presents a form of idolatry, which pagans are prone to do; but such idolatry is condemned in the Bible.

No it doesn’t Idolatry is what you are engaged in now, the idolatry of your self.

Now why do I say that? Because you insist on your own way as against what Jesus taught. That, is making yourself God, the determiner of truth.

We on the other hand worship God by believing what He said He was going to do.

The Holy Spirit indwells all born again believers given to Christ by the Father.

Yes, you are right there.

By means of the Holy Spirit, Jesus also spiritually indwells all believers. That explains “The kingdom of Christ is within”.

That is true as well.

This kingdom of Christ is not speaking of any physical indwelling or physical presence at this time.

We never said that Jesus physically indwells us.

A physical presence of Christ will happen at the promised Second Coming,

Yes that too. But He is also present in the Eucharist, Body, Soul and Divinity because He said so.

I can understand why you cannot comprehend this. Berengarius came up with those same thoughts 1000 years ago.

 

[benedictus2]

I do not trust new histories created by fundamentalist preachers who spent questionable years in questionable bible schools,

Actually, it seems, contrary to intents and purposes, these questionable Bible schools have produced great and wonderful Catholics. I think of Tim Staples who enrolled so he can defend his faith and ended being converted to Catholicism instead .

Then there’s a whole lot of them (Scott Hahn, etc) who came from this school and who ended up great defenders of the Catholic Faith.

Ahh the Holy Spirit is always at work indeed to bring everyone home.

 

[PRmerger]

oca.org/CHRIST-life-article.asp?SID=6&ID=132&MONTH=June&YEAR=2007

Incidentally, Rome finds Orthodoxy’s view acceptable; yet finds the Lutheran and Anglican views, which are almost identical to the East’s as unacceptable. This is beyond the view of Holy Orders.

Interesting.

I did not see in that article any denial of the CC’s teaching on transubstantiation.

I did look up more info on this OCA and it seems they are autocephalous. Thus, do all other Orthodox Churches teach that “the Roman dogma of transubstantiation is false”?

I could find nothing that supports that–only articles on catholic.com that state we are in dogmatic agreement with the Orthodox on transubstantiation, although they don’t use the term (Latin root and all that, it seems).

 

[benedictus2]

I will put it in two simple words that also Luther has used: SOLA GRATIA (alone through mercy!)

If we accept Christ Jesus as our Savior and so become Christians - and are then baptized with Water and the Holy Ghost. - Baptizm Water as an outward sign. - Then we are saved. We don’t need the Eucharist.

That maybe what Luther said: But here’s what Christ said: Unless you eat of the flesh of the son of man you will have no life you.

So who do we belive, Luther or Jesus Christ?

The Eucharist as the Catholics are practicing it, is a pagan rite. [/quoe]
So you are saying that Christ commanded us to practice a pagan ritual?

The Last Supper was ONLY meant as a Feast in His remembrance - what He did on the Cross for US. - He took all our sins up to the cross and the promissory note is now torn apart. We can go no faithfully to our Lord, YHWH, our Father in heaven again.

You’ve got several things happening here.Let’s take it one by one.

If the Last supper is ONLY a feast in His remembrance, then How do you suppose we can obey His command to eat his flesh and drink His blood. Isn’t it rather forgetful of Christ to command us to do something and not give us the means to do it.?

And if it is just a remembrance, then what does it profit to remember it. Why command us to do THIS, the eating of His Body and drinking His blood if it is all just play acting.

How would having a meal be a remembrance of His death on the cross. Where do you establish a correlation between eating bread and His sacrifice on the cross?

 

[benedictus2]

oca.org/CHRIST-life-article.asp?SID=6&ID=132&MONTH=June&YEAR=2007

Incidentally, Rome finds Orthodoxy’s view acceptable; yet finds the Lutheran and Anglican views, which are almost identical to the East’s as unacceptable. This is beyond the view of Holy Orders.

The reason they do not accept the Anglican and Lutheran view is because both believe in con-substantiation, i.e. the bread and wine remain but that Christ is mingled in that bread and wine.

The East’s belief is the same as the Catholic belief. It IS Jesus Christ, and the bread and wine no longer remain after the consecration.

The difference between Easter and Catholic is that the east does not define it. They know it is Christ and they leave it at that. The Catholic Church defined it. And usually definition of doctrine comes because it has been questioned. As I mentioned before, Berengarius in 1000 AD questioned the reality of Christ’s presence. But it was not till St Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century that the Church was able to get to define to a certain degree what happens.

Incidentally, there is story about St Thomas regarding the writing of his thesis on this.
After he had written about transubstantiation, he put his work at the foot of the cross and offered it to Christ and he prayed.

It is said that Christ said to him, “You have spoken well of me Thomas, what will you have as a reward?”

To which St Thomas answered “Nothing but you Lord”.

 

[rev_kevin]

Its Christ and Christ alone who is the church. We are extensions of his church, Catholic, Baptist and the others

Aaahhhh…I am not in agreement with that specific sentence. Christ Body is ONE,not individual extensions (different churches) of His Body (ONE) all teaching different things. Sorry,but that is not what Christ left or the type of church he founded.

He, [Christ] is the one who gave these gifts to the church: the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, and the pastors and teachers.[seems to me to be different denominations] Their responsibilty is to equip God’s people to do his work and build up the church, the body of Christ. [who or what is the church, the body of Christ, not a single man named church or denomination, its Christ himself.] Christ, who is the head of his body, the church.[not a single man named church or denomination, the church is Christ] Under his direction, the whole body is fitted together perfectly, As each part does its own special work, it helps the other parts grow, so that the whole body is healthy and growing and full of love. We are all one body, we have the same Spirit, and we have all been called to the same glorious future. The church Christ founded is himself.

 

[KathleenGee]

Benedictus…so true these fundamentalist churches have produced fine scholars…I recommend Dr Scott Hahn’s conversion a must for those who oppose Catholic teaching.

Scott has been there.

 

[KathleenGee]

Jesus did not ‘found’ Himself. Jesus is. He was the channel through which God created the universe.

Jesus renamed Simon, the very last night He was with him to Peter or Pedra meaning rock. Jesus said, ‘Upon this rock I will build my church’. Jesus founded His church on Peter… This is most significant.

And we have hashed this over many times, the same quote from Scripture.

 

[Nicea325]

He, [Christ] is the one who gave these gifts to the church: the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, and the pastors and teachers.[seems to me to be different denominations] Their responsibilty is to equip God’s people to do his work and build up the church, the body of Christ. [who or what is the church, the body of Christ, not a single man named church or denomination, its Christ himself.] Christ, who is the head of his body, the church.[not a single man named church or denomination, the church is Christ] Under his direction, the whole body is fitted together perfectly, As each part does its own special work, it helps the other parts grow, so that the whole body is healthy and growing and full of love. We are all one body, we have the same Spirit, and we have all been called to the same glorious future. The church Christ founded is himself.

**He, [Christ] is the one who gave these gifts to the church: the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, and the pastors and teachers.[seems to me to be different denominations] **

Jesus founded thousands of different denominations? It is nice to wish and dream,but that is not what Christ founded:thousands of different denominations. Christ is not the author of confusion.No way! Not even close.I am sorry,but you are out to make scripture say something it does not say. Not even close. Jesus did not found different denominations and to believe otherwise is a complete error.