You really believe that people left Jesus (the only time that happens in the Gospels) over a figurative “eating” of His words? Jesus had a LOT of hard sayings for the people, and they never left Him any other time.
When Jesus says you will have no LIFE within you if you don’t eat His Flesh, it’s a bit more serious than an ordinance to identify followers.
St. Paul certainly didn’t agree with this. In fact he flatly stated you could damn yourself to hell for it.
He never once calls another object HIM. Except for the Eucharist. He never once points to a door and says “that door is Me”. He never once points to a vine and says “that vine is Me”.
Seems a REALLY important point that we should know one way or the other. Why would God leave us as orphans to wonder about such a question? Who did Jesus and the Apostles tell us to turn to when such questions arise?
.
Amen. And we learn about Him from His Church, which is the pillar and foundation of the truth.
:extrahappy:I dont think this is such a departure from the Catholic faith. Maybe the distinction of the slight difference would be that we say “participating” or “receiving” Him AFTER His death/resurrection must be done through His Eucharist devotion. In other words, those who DO believe in Him, NOW… must stay with Him in His Eucharist environment and reception. At the celebration of our Lord, we HEAR the Word and we Hear the Words of our Lord when He said, “This is my Body which will be given up for you, take and eat.”
But my “Judas” point earlier is lost on you if you don’t take into consideration that He was a goat who did stay, and receive, and participate, and receive the word, and finally His Eucharist. And he is not the only one! They’re all over the Church, and eating His Eucharist!
ZZ, I you are only focused on one tree in the forest. There is more to it than v.54. Again, please look back to v.40. Please see that it also has the exact same promise,namely “eternal life” and resurrection. Tell me if this is not so. What does it mean to you? Are we dealing wth two different promises? One for Catholics and one for Protestants? Rather i think that the answer is the same as for all other parables. One is figurative and the other is literal. In all other parables of Jesus, the physical illustrates the spiritual. Is there a reason why this one is different?
Define “properly” here.
Judas was always a son of the devil. If he had been saved and then lost, the falt would be charged to Jesus. Jesus "called"Judas but he was not chosen.Define “properly” here.
I’d say, as I did in my last post, that he did not remain in a state of grace. He ate, not necessarily while not believing, but not allowing the Word to convert his heart CONTINUALLY. He took the “hard saying” and decided to put his spin on things. He stayed because he thought there would be advantage in this world for him.
Was Judas ever in a state of grace? Only God knows. But at His calling, he was justified (this is a state of grace. An initial justification. An acceptance to the life of Christ). He was given the ministry of the Lord.
Woe to us if we turn from it for the pleasures of this world. Let us pray for His strength.
Remember what the Holy Spirit said about Mary?
Luke 2:19
But Mary kept all these things, pondering them in her heart.
Luke 2:51
And he went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was obedient to them; and his mother kept all these things in her heart
And Jesus confirmed this:
Luke 11:28
But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”
Those who keep His Word remain in Him and His Eucharistic body.
What? What does it mean to be called but not chosen?
Incidentally, the above comment directly CONTRADICTS Scripture.
70*Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?”71He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the twelve, was to betray him.
And the reply is not a slight to Mary, but a compliment to her true blessedness which Luke already recorded from the Holy Spirit through Elizabeth. And He also implies that all who do as Mary are blessed like her. This is her motherhood to all Christians
I don’t see it exactly like this.
Well the rich man certainly encountered a hard saying and left.
Actually the warning can be applied to the several varied views of “communion”. That is, all could be participated in “unworthily”.
And which ones ate His Eucharist?
Yes, we can. Any church that puts forth the good news, the Word of God, puts the listener in a position to not only learn about Him , but actually meet Him.
Yes, and how did they eat ?
With their mouth at the last supper, and in a state of grace because they converted their hearts by the Spirit. Yet Judas was not in His grace. So he ate condemnation on himself.
But please don’t think that we separate the two meanings. We recognize them as combined at His Word at the Last Supper.
When I read John 6:64, I see the possibility that Jesus is separating the two, “Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him.” I also don’t see where Judas was one of the disciples who left, as it says Jesus addressed the Twelve and asked " do you also want to leave?", this is after the unbelievers already had left.
of course with their mouth ,yet I heard an augustine quote that is hard to forget,“leave your teeth and bellies behind”, as if stressing the “unbloodiness” of it, even figurativism,and that we eat the elements in faith, the Word(s) in faith.Judas was condemned already, for his betrayal already in motion.
There have been many commentaries regarding this being the “point of no return” for Judas. He simply could not accept Jesus’ command to eat his flesh.