If John 6 is speaking of the eucharist, how can non Catholics be saved?

[Cybophonia]

St. Ignatius

“Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.”

“Letter to the Smyrnaeans”, paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.

“Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is **one Flesh **of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons.”

-Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.

St. Justin Martyr

“God has therefore announced in advance that all the sacrifices offered in His name, which Jesus Christ offered, that is, in the Eucharist of the Bread and of the Chalice, which are offered by us Christians in every part of the world, are pleasing to Him.”

“Dialogue with Trypho”, Ch. 117, circa 130-160 A.D.

Didache

“On the Lord’s own day, assemble in common to break bread and offer thanks; but first confess your sins, so that your sacrifice may be pure. However, no one quarreling with his brother may join your meeting until they are reconciled; your sacrifice must not be defiled. For here we have the saying of the Lord: ‘In every place and time offer me a pure sacrifice; for I am a mighty King, says the Lord; and my name spreads terror among the nations.’”

-Ch 14

I don’t understand precisely what you imply, but can you cite scholastic sources when dealing with scholastic sources?

 

[rcwitness]

John 20:22

And when he had said this, hebreathedon them, and said to*them, “Receive the Holy Spirit."

When Jesus did this, was His breath merely a symbol, or was His Spirit actually given through His breath?

 

[zz912]

I don’t understand precisely what you imply, but can you cite scholastic sources when dealing with scholastic sources?

Each quote is cited from the original writing. You are free to look them up.

And I was showing quotes that disagree with the assertion in your post that the idea of a propitiary sacrifice was unknown.

 

[Cybophonia]

Each quote is cited from the original writing. You are free to look them up.

And I was showing quotes that disagree with the assertion in your post that the idea of a propitiary sacrifice was unknown.

Which scholars support your claim and can you bring citations?

It is not an “assertion” and it is not mine. It’s what scholars say. You never heard of the Agape meal?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agape_feast

 

[benhur]

Very simply the non-believer is sanctified through the believer. Remember the words of St. Paul who has also stated this in one of his letters, the unbeliever is sanctified by the one who believes. This means whenever we come to the throne of Grace to receive the Lord Jesus, the Lord Jesus not only imparts His life into us but He also gives it to the rest of the world. The believer sanctifies the unbeliever because the believer has come to receive the One who is able to do this. The Chalice does pour itself into the world in ways we can never fathom!

Hi chimo

I beg to differ on what Paul meant about unbelieving spouse/children being sanctified by believing spouse/parent. In his context sanctification does not mean justification or salvation. It does put distance between jewish law /custom that a gentile woman giving birth to Jew is still not a "son, even unclean. “Unclean /holy” deal with heathen vs Christian in regards to *rearing *children, not personal spiritual standing of the children/spouse. Paul goes on to say stay married for maybe (who knows) your unbelieving spouse may come to faith, be saved.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

In the early church Baptism was usually preceded by some kind of catechesis albeit not as involved as later centuries. It was not immediate.

Out of the 4 or 5 instances in scripture the baptism was immediate to faith , belief. Only one case was later, and that because they had not heard of this new baptism, and then i think immediately were baptized.

Now if you mean catechesis is same as the gospel being preached to an unbeliever(s) well then of course it precedes baptism. I thought catechesis is teaching/instructing a believer, but before baptism.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Very simply the non-believer is sanctified through the believer. Remember the words of St. Paul who has also stated this in one of his letters, the unbeliever is sanctified by the one who believes. This means whenever we come to the throne of* Grace* to receive the Lord Jesus, the Lord Jesus not only imparts His life into us but He also gives it to the rest of the world. The believer sanctifies the unbeliever because the believer has come to receive the One who is able to do this. The Chalice does pour itself into the world in ways we can never fathom!

Hi chimo,

I reread thread and see more of what you are trying to say. For sure CC says, as PR posted, baptism makes us all "catholic’, though some imperfectly. Are you sure CC says your faith in Chalice covers me for not believing to eat Christ’s flesh, which CC interprets as a must for eternal life ?

Does your belief in transubstantiation, and participation in it release Grace to sanctify me save me (of that requirement) ?

Blessings

 

[benhur]

The quotation is from 1Cor. 7 where Paul refers to a believing wife sanctifying her unbelieving husband and vice versa. If a believer can sancify the unbeliever than it can happen as well with those who come to the Eucharist who can help sancify those who do not come to the Eucharist. St. Paul was jealous for his own race to know what he knows. This does not mean the Jewish people are not saved. In some mysterious act which God grants to them on behalf of the Church God can save them as well. Paul wanted his Jewish people to know more but since the grace and mercy of God can be more applicable in and through the Church it can be also said that this grace and mercy is poured into the world because of the Church. Now I am referring to the Eucharist here. The power of the Eucharist is not properly understood by Protestants who do not accept the real presence of our Lord. Protestants think of the Eucharist as only symbolic which of course they can only present the Eucharist as. The Apostlolic Churches which have the power to change the bread and wine into Jesus Christ have this authority to dispense the Graces contained in such an Eucharistic encounter into the rest of the world. That is incredible! Therefore by this action which the Church celebrates the Holy Communion the Lord is able to send forth His Graces elsewhere. That is how the Lord can save those outside the Church. Since those outside the Church cannot come to the Sacraments or come to hear the saving Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ the means to save them can still come when a believer comes to receive the Lord Jesus in Holy Communion. This enables the Lord to dispense His Graces not only to the receiver but to those who live in the world who have not heard the Gospel.

I have heard of the grace"bank" That every good deed, or prayer or indulgence adds to the church’s grace bank from which God may move on behalf of the church , in this world ? Is that what you reference ?

 

[benhur]

Each quote is cited from the original writing. You are free to look them up.

And I was showing quotes that disagree with the assertion in your post that the idea of a propitiary sacrifice was unknown.

Hi zz

Propitiation is what we have in Christ and Calvary. It is God’s sacrifice and the Lords, for us. *He gave us *the "sacrifice’’. We give thanks for the propitiation, and in remembrance, and looking to His coming again. It is a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving hence eucharist. We do not make the propitiation a sacrifice. We give thanks. We Eucharist.

At least it was in the beginning. I struggle with the evolving into thisriest: “Pray that our sacrifice may be acceptable to God , the Father” or “And so father we bring you these gifts”, Participants:May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands, for the praise and glory of His name."

All of a sudden it appears as our gift to God and we pray, as in hope, that it is acceptable. Do we not already know it is acceptable and was accepted and forever shall be ? Was He not resurrected in approval ? He gives us a gift of His only Son and we give it back and hope He approves it ? What happened to the just Thanksgiving?

I understand however, that from the CC perspective it is a done deal, once for all sacrifice, and they give thanks, while at the same time ask that the Father accept the re presenting of Calvary thru the symbols in the priests hand, and pray they are transformed into His body and blood.(this last part I do not find in the earliest church writings, but do not deny they evolved later, as did the need for the priest).

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Can there be different loaves??? What constitutes a true ‘Loaf’?

Good question rc.

Are we better off for figuring it out, doctinalizing, anathemizing instead of just doing it, like the early church. But I suppose this was all inevitable and OK ( for the Lord apparently is allowing it). I tend to think that the less legalistic approach might be best.(less, for indeed some legalism, discernment, is called for) .

Blessings

 

[eazyduzit]

The quotation is from 1Cor. 7 where Paul refers to a believing wife sanctifying her unbelieving husband and vice versa. If a believer can sancify the unbeliever than it can happen as well with those who come to the Eucharist who can help sancify those who do not come to the Eucharist. St. Paul was jealous for his own race to know what he knows. This does not mean the Jewish people are not saved. In some mysterious act which God grants to them on behalf of the Church God can save them as well. Paul wanted his Jewish people to know more but since the grace and mercy of God can be more applicable in and through the Church it can be also said that this grace and mercy is poured into the world because of the Church. Now I am referring to the Eucharist here. The power of the Eucharist is not properly understood by Protestants who do not accept the real presence of our Lord. Protestants think of the Eucharist as only symbolic which of course they can only present the Eucharist as. The Apostlolic Churches which have the power to change the bread and wine into Jesus Christ have this authority to dispense the Graces contained in such an Eucharistic encounter into the rest of the world. That is incredible! Therefore by this action which the Church celebrates the Holy Communion the Lord is able to send forth His Graces elsewhere. That is how the Lord can save those outside the Church. Since those outside the Church cannot come to the Sacraments or come to hear the saving Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ the means to save them can still come when a believer comes to receive the Lord Jesus in Holy Communion. This enables the Lord to dispense His Graces not only to the receiver but to those who live in the world who have not heard the Gospel.

You don’t understand what evangelicals believe. Communion is spiritual, not physical. The Bible plainly states that we may receive nothing from heaven except by faith. It would profit nothing to have a flesh relationship with Christ. Paul says we know Him no longer after the flesh. He is only available to us in the spirit, so to seek Him in the flesh is useless. Communion is indeed very real. It strengthens the spirit and heals the soul and brings healing to the body through spiritual manifestation.

As for your question of “sanctifying”, that falls short of salvation. No one may be saved or even baptized without personal repentance.

 

[rcwitness]

Are we better off for figuring it out, doctinalizing, anathemizing instead of just doing it, like the early church.

Apparently we need to do both. You are assuming to know the position of the early Church.

Paul told us to discern the Body of the Lord, condemned abuses of His Eucharist, and excommunicated some for not turning from sin.

But I suppose this was all inevitable and OK ( for the Lord apparently is allowing it).

This can have levels of understanding. We would agree that God gives grace to us in our condition of invincible ignorance. But what is His will in this discourse? He abviously wants us to believe. We can agree on that much. But what is the fullness of believing in Him? You will only find that in participating in His Eucharist.

I tend to think that the less legalistic approach might be best.(less, for indeed some legalism, discernment, is called for) .

I agree we should not be “legalistic”.

But Law is also Truth. Like the Law of gravity is actually a Truth. So because Jesus brought the highest Law or Truth of His grace, it does not mean that a Communion which is at odds with another is His will.

There is One Communion. Not many which come out of various faiths and opinions.

 

[rcwitness]

A couple things about the Teaching…

51 I am the living bread[a] which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

Jesus tells us He shall or will give His bread for the world. This is in the future tense. Because they see Him, but still do not believe.

60 Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? 62 Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before?[e] 63 It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. 64 But there are some of you that do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that should betray him. 65 And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

Jesus explains His words are life and spirit before the disciples leave Him. This doesn’t support the opinion that He was merely speaking symbolically. Though we certainly believe His Eucharist is equal to His Spirit and Life! And that it was the Spirit which Jesus came from and fully obeyed. And that His Spirit proceeded from Himself to us.

This is why I asked about Jesus breathing on His Eleven to give them the Holy Spirit later on in John’s book. It was important for God to do so, not only as a symbol but for a reality that His Spirit was delivered to us in fullness through His Son.

Also, there is the connection with Judas who remained with the Eleven, but John points This out here. This is because the moment of His betrayal was at the Lord’s institution of His Eucharist.

 

[zz912]

At least it was in the beginning. I struggle with the evolving into thisriest: “Pray that our sacrifice may be acceptable to God , the Father” or “And so father we bring you these gifts”, Participants:May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands, for the praise and glory of His name."

All of a sudden it appears as our gift to God and we pray, as in hope, that it is acceptable. Do we not already know it is acceptable and was accepted and forever shall be ? Was He not resurrected in approval ? He gives us a gift of His only Son and we give it back and hope He approves it ? What happened to the just Thanksgiving?

Our sacrifice is what we bring to participate in Christ’s sacrifice. We bring the bread and wine for God to transform into His Body and Blood. We bring our offerings of money to fund His Church.

We are asking God to accept our offerings to Him as our part is participating in Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice.

 

[zz912]

Out of the 4 or 5 instances in scripture the baptism was immediate to faith , belief. Only one case was later, and that because they had not heard of this new baptism, and then i think immediately were baptized.

Now if you mean catechesis is same as the gospel being preached to an unbeliever(s) well then of course it precedes baptism. I thought catechesis is teaching/instructing a believer, but before baptism.

Blessings

Entire households were baptized on the faith of the person in charge of the household. Households in those times included young children and infants.

 

[zz912]

You don’t understand what evangelicals believe.

Well to be fair, it changes depending on which evangelical you talk to.

Communion is spiritual, not physical.

That’s your opinion. The vast bulk of the Christian world and Christian history disagree with your opinion.

The Bible plainly states that we may receive nothing from heaven except by faith.

How does that preclude a physical communion?

It would profit nothing to have a flesh relationship with Christ.

That’s a shocking thing to hear a Christian say. You might think more about this statement before letting it leave your lips again.

Paul says we know Him no longer after the flesh.

Nice try, but no. That passage in 2 Cor 5 is talking about recognizing Him in His deity and not according to the views of this world, the fleshly world.

He is only available to us in the spirit, so to seek Him in the flesh is useless.

St. Paul disagrees with you in 1 Cor.

Communion is indeed very real. It strengthens the spirit and heals the soul and brings healing to the body through spiritual manifestation.

Agreed. The Holy Spirit makes Jesus’s Body and Blood manifest right before us in the Eucharist.

As for your question of “sanctifying”, that falls short of salvation. No one may be saved or even baptized without personal repentance.

So infants and young children are damned?

 

[PRmerger]

Well to be fair, it changes depending on which evangelical you talk to.

Too true. Too true.

As there is no magisterium, no central authority, each evangelical is his own pope and decides for himself what it means to be a Bible-believing follower of Christ.

 

[simspt]

Out of the 4 or 5 instances in scripture the baptism was immediate to faith , belief. Only one case was later, and that because they had not heard of this new baptism, and then i think immediately were baptized.

Now if you mean catechesis is same as the gospel being preached to an unbeliever(s) well then of course it precedes baptism. I thought catechesis is teaching/instructing a believer, but before baptism.

Blessings

The NT offers very little info on the way baptism was carried out however there would have been a preliminary period of instruction in the faith at minimum for Gentile candidates who were not well versed in the religious background possessed by Jewish converts. I agree it was nowhere as extensive as formal catechumenate in later centuries. For example Justin Martyr describes a process that consisted of a period of instruction (albeit unspecified), fasting, and prayer by both the candidate and community before the baptism, then immersion that was accompanied by the assent of the candidate and the naming of the Trinity and finishing by entering the assembly of other Christians to share a common prayer, the kiss and the celebration of the Eucharist with them. (see 1 Apol. 61, 65) This practice was similar to that found in Syria.

 

[eddie_too]

because the Eucharist is the real Presence of Jesus Christ, it is only through the Eucharist that a human being, in this world, can be completely in communion with the Risen Lord.

we can be united to the Risen Lord in a spiritual sense in many ways other than the Eucharist. for example, almsgiving, works of charity and prayer are all means of uniting spiritually with our Lord.

only through the Eucharist can we be physically in communion with the Lord’s Body and Blood.

John 6 gives us much to contemplate, does not virtually every verse in the bible?

it may be that Jesus was referring directly to those who were listening to Him at that point in time and did not intend for this to restrict entry in to heaven. we know for example that there is baptism of desire and that those who receive baptism of desire have died before they receive the sacrament of baptism and before they can partake in the Eucharist. yet we also believe that they go to heaven. like I said, there is much to contemplate in John 6.

also, Jesus said that there are others who are not members of this flock. He also said, in referring to rich people and the eye of the camel that, for God all things are possible.

for Catholics, the complete union with Christ that, in this world, can only be received through reception of the consecrated Body and Blood is a gift beyond compare and a gift beyond complete understanding.

when catholics preach the Real Presence of Jesus in the consecrated bread and wine, we do not do so as a means to condemn others or to prevent them from entering heaven. we do so because it is what Jesus told us to do and because of the real and holy effect total communion with Christ provides to the believer.

 

[eddie_too]

I was taught that in the early Church the catechumenate (or whatever the time of instruction prior to baptism and formal entry in to the Church) lasted for several years.

I could have heard or remembered wrong about that.