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

[JMM1957]

Yes good point but that is why I posted access to the highest level,the deepest, even pinacle ,ultimate, as Catholics have described the Eucharist, or as OT with their yearly event entering the holy of holies( though of course they had a relationship with Jehovah thru out the year.)

Blessings

ben, we Catholics here on this thread have gone way beyond what Jesus did in John 6 in regards to the unbelievers who went away.

 

[benhur]

If I’m understanding you rightly (and admittedly I haven’t read all of your conversations with various posters on this thread) you’re saying that the Roman Catholic Church has the Eucharist and your church does not … But you stay there anyway?

Well, perhaps you missed the post, but that is not what I am saying,at all. The Catholic Eucharist is unique to Catholics. It is not quite the same,though maybe similar, to say the Orthodox Eucharist, or the Lutheran Eucharist, or Anglican etc. I have posted we all “Eucharist”, we all participate in the ceremony, the remembrance rite or sacrament as some say.

Blessings

 

[rcwitness]

Probably so as you state. The Catholic Eucharist communion is quite unique. I would say however, that for most churches it is a corporate,congregational ceremony. Like any" party" the bigger the better.

Also as you know these folks also claim like others that Christ, even the Holy Spirit is in them already,and they are to be filled daily in the Spirit, and even to overflowing, thru non sacramental/ ceremonial ways.

Corporately, like others again, they believe that where two or more are together, there Christ is in the midst of them. So as your example of a small bible study group, hearts can burn with revelation just as it did with the two on the road conversing with a risen Christ. I do not think they would say Christ would be more with them or in them thru their communion rite/sacrament at the bible study. And unlike the two on the road there in the book of Acts, they recognize Christ without having to see His hands break bread.

There is a time and place for everything. One can over indulge in anything that is gracious to us. We are thankful for the many things the Lord and Peter and John did,and what they did not do, such as not lingering too much on the high at the Mount of Transfiguration, not making the means an end.

Blessings

So you are defending the “non-denominational” church communion for adhering to a large, pastor led practice while criticizing the Catholic communion for recognizing a “priest” as constituting a proper corporal and legal communion?

Seems like a double standard. Communion is not just receiving Jesus, it’s receiving Jesus as the whole body does when we come together.

When I see the non-denominational it’s actually practice a Breaking Bread outside of their leaders, then their “No Priests” stance will have more ground.

Btw, do you believe the disciples on the road to Emmaus merely recognized Jesus from the manner He broke bread? Or did they eat it and then He opened their eyes?

 

[rcwitness]

Also, the Priesthood of the old covenant were only able to eat the “Bread of Presence”. The new Covenant Ministerial Priesthood SERVES the Eucharistic Bread to the members.

 

[Telstar]

Timothy and Titus were not “heirus” priests.

Hi, ben.

I’d really appreciate it if you could define “heirus” for those of us who have never heard that term, before. I’m assuming you spelled it correctly, but I can’t find any references to it, or any definition of it, anywhere. I tried to google it, but all I kept finding was some kind of rap group called “Heiruspecs”.

Without some kind of explanation of what you mean by that terminology, we can’t figure out what that statement means.

Thanks.

 

[Peter_J]

Well, perhaps you missed the post, but that is not what I am saying,at all. The Catholic Eucharist is unique to Catholics. It is not quite the same,though maybe similar, to say the Orthodox Eucharist, or the Lutheran Eucharist, or Anglican etc. I have posted we all “Eucharist”, we all participate in the ceremony, the remembrance rite or sacrament as some say.

Blessings

Hi again. I’m not sure that helps me understand this

I hope you can see the C viewpoint has been well explained to me and I believe I understand it. I understand and have posted what others have said, that the Eucharist is a sacrament,grace impartIng and the deepest union with Christ one can have on this side of life. **My post merely said this is only possible (communion) thru a priest. Only he, thru ,Christ can “consecrate”. Not an elder or deacon or brother, even a “president/presider” as called by the early church, can transubstantiate.( and certainly not any Protestant presbyter for the most part) . **That was my point, open to any correction.

but in rereading it I think I may have figured it out myself: my guess is that when you said “My post merely said …” you meant to say “*Catholics *have said …”

Is that right?

 

[Telstar]

Well “facilitate” is pretty close to “intermediary” as in ot priestly function. That is whatever sacramental graces are to be had in either covenant it still must be thru priest in CC. The most sacred place in ot was not the sanctuary but the holy of holies, that could be entered only once a year, and that by an intermediary. The most sacred place to meet or commune with Christ to a C is the Eucharist but only thru the priest. I mean ot folk had equal access to the blessings and graces of the yearly entrance to the holy of holies also. But they could not go in as if they were the high priest. Yet as Christians,we are to have that direct access, for that veil has been torn in two. Yet as a Catholic, besides the ceremony of the communion, a priest is needed. That to me is still a veil, much like the veil that the consecrated host after a mass was placed behind years ago in Catholic Churches

Blessings

Hi, ben.

You seem to be comparing apples to oranges in your post. The Holy of Holies in the Jewish Temple was a room that was completely separated from all the people. It was the Sanctuary where God dwelt within the Temple (originally within the Arc of the Covenant). No one was allowed to even enter into His presence except for those times that were designated for special ceremonies. Even the High Priest was only allowed inside of it, during those times. But, the Jewish Priests did not turn the Holy of Holies into God, like the Catholic Priest turns bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. Did they? No.

The closest thing to compare to the Holy of Holies, in the Catholic Church, is the Tabernacle on the Altar that holds the remaining Holy Eucharist after Mass (which is why Jesus is always physically present in a Catholic Church). The Eucharist that we receive during Mass is nothing like the Holy of Holies. So, your comparison of those two things is like comparing apples to oranges.

When the veil was torn asunder, it symbolized the breaking down of the great barrier that was created by the fall of Adam and Eve, between God and mankind. Now, not only can we all sit in the physical presence of God (in the Tabernacle), but we can actually enter into God, and He will enter into us when we consume the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, in the Holy Eucharist.

The veil between God and man is gone, forever. We no longer need to remain totally separated from Him. Yes, it’s true that the Priest alone has the power to transform the bread and wine into the Eucharist during Mass, but we can all partake of that Glorious Food as long as we are fully prepared to accept it for what it really is, the Body of Christ.

 

[Alex_H]

Hi Alex,

The response is pretty good from a Catholic viewpoint, just hope it wasn’t motivated by any teenage hormones trying to buck the old man. There are times when father’s know best is just water off a duck’s back…The Lord commands many things.

Blessings

PS- Welcome to CAF

Thank you so much, benhur!!

Yeah I am 21 but I live with my dad for the time being while I go to college. I believe he started the conversation just by asking why I feel drawn to the Catholic faith. I told him about John 6 and the conversation kind of went on from there.

 

[rcwitness]

I doubt that…

Isaiah 6:4-9

4And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke.5And I said: “Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, theLord*of hosts!”

6*Then flew one of the seraphim to me, having in his hand a burning coal which he had taken with tongs from the altar.7And he touched my mouth, and said: “Behold, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away, and your sin forgiven.”8And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here am I! Send me.”9And he said, “Go, and say to this people:

‘Hear and hear, but do not understand;
see and see, but do not perceive.’

An interesting encounter here. And in particular, the Mass literally means “go forth” or sent, to those who have Heard, and received from the Lord’s table.

So is this symbolic only?

 

[benhur]

So you are defending the “non-denominational” church communion for adhering to a large, pastor led practice

Well not sure I would word it that way, with "adherence’ as if there were a dogmatic formula for “size”. I did not mean large as in mega, but as in the congregation as a whole, large or small, as opposed to smaller segments (bible study group, men’s group, or women’s group within said congregation etc…) to be the common practice. Again I have seen smaller groups “commune” but it is rare

…criticizing the Catholic communion for recognizing a “priest” as constituting a proper corporal and legal communion?Seems like a double standard.

I do not criticize that a priest can preside a communion. The criticism is that a deacon, or elder, or a cleric “brother” or seminarian can not. The word "exclusive’’ has been used by Catholic’s here for who can preside. Your priest and my pastor are fine in leading the service. Not a double standard.

When I see the non-denominational it’s actually practice a Breaking Bread outside of their leaders, then their “No Priests” stance will have more ground.

Well that may be more a rhetorical response, for the question is just what is defined by a leader, who can and who can not “preside”, and one who presides leads… You go from priest/pastor to “leaders”. A youth pastor is a leader. A deacon is a leader. An elder is a leader. A mature, spirit filled/walking parishioner can lead/preside a service. Pastors very often do not "preside’’ over communion.

Btw, do you believe the disciples on the road to Emmaus merely recognized Jesus from the manner He broke bread? Or did they eat it and then He opened their eyes?

Can not tell from the verse. The NIV says upon the giving (of bread) they saw. The guest becomes the Host, as He did for 3 and a half years of ministry, from feeding the thousands to the Last Supper is a big clue. Some suggest that they finally saw His hands. But if you suggest it was at the eating, maybe. Does not say it is or isn’t. But it certainly happened after the breaking and giving.That we know is written.

Blessings rc

 

[benhur]

Hi, ben.

I’d really appreciate it if you could define “heirus” for those of us who have never heard that term, before. I’m assuming you spelled it correctly, but I can’t find any references to it, or any definition of it, anywhere. I tried to google it, but all I kept finding was some kind of rap group called “Heiruspecs”.

Without some kind of explanation of what you mean by that terminology, we can’t figure out what that statement means.

Thanks.

hiereus is the greek word for priest, used almost exclusively in OT and rarely in NT

 

[benhur]

Hi again. I’m not sure that helps me understand this

but in rereading it I think I may have figured it out myself: my guess is that when you said “My post merely said …” you meant to say “*Catholics *have said …”

Is that right?

Well,it covers a few posts but yes Catholics and now i say that(exclusivity for a presiding priest)

 

[benhur]

Also, the Priesthood of the old covenant were only able to eat the “Bread of Presence”. The new Covenant Ministerial Priesthood SERVES the Eucharistic Bread to the members.

Yes, but all ate manna , and the feasting of/on unleavened (pure) bread Passover). So strictly speaking of holy of holies, where God presided, tabernacled.

 

[benhur]

But, the Jewish Priests did not turn the Holy of Holies into God, like the Catholic Priest turns bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. Did they? No.

But the priest is the intermediary between the people and God. Without the priest , the connection is lost in such ceremony (yearly entrance into Tabernacle and C Eucharist).

The closest thing to compare to the Holy of Holies, in the Catholic Church, is the Tabernacle on the Altar that holds the remaining Holy Eucharist after Mass (which is why Jesus is always physically present in a Catholic Church).

Yes, thank you. They used to lock the Host(s) up after service in that Tabernacle, or was placed behind a veil. Once in a while the veil would be opened , or Host taken out.

When the veil was torn asunder, it symbolized the breaking down of the great barrier that was created by the fall of Adam and Eve, between God and mankind. Now, not only can we all sit in the physical presence of God (in the Tabernacle), but we can actually enter into God, and He will enter into us when we consume the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, in the Holy Eucharist.

Amen. very well put. Just do not see it pertaining to receiving sacramental elements. If anything, the Thanksgiving takes place for and because the Lord, God Himself, has already entered us in regeneration, being born of His spirit, being born again.

Thank you for your post T. Blessings

 

[benhur]

Thank you so much, benhur!!

Yeah I am 21 but I live with my dad for the time being while I go to college. I believe he started the conversation just by asking why I feel drawn to the Catholic faith. I told him about John 6 and the conversation kind of went on from there.

How old were you at the time ?

 

[benhur]

So is this symbolic only?

Does “Mass” mean that ? Sounds literal as is it for all disciples, and for any form of communion…

 

[benhur]

What do you have in life, any sphere of your life, that does not require the mediation of someone else?

I qualified with the term “sacramental”, not “any sphere”…

So in your life of faith, why would you begrudge certain gifts of service given to certain unique individuals by grace? You have gifts, am I correct? Are your gifts meant for the edification of others? Or are they merely an exclusive personal gift?

I do not see the gift of transubstantiating listed with His giftings.

It is a deception that we are our own personal and exclusive mediators with Jesus Christ.

Agree that we are placed in His body, the ecclesia the church and are not an island unto ourselves. But again,was only bringing who can and who can not preside over a communion.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

What type of priests were they? And what distinction are you creating?

Hiereus and presbyteros. Not my creation.

 

[rcwitness]

Does “Mass” mean that ? Sounds literal as is it for all disciples, and for any form of communion…

Yes, the word “Mass” means to “be sent”, or “go forth”, etc.

We come together to hear the Word, to worship Him, to eat and drink of His Eucharist, and to pray. We are then, sent out from this “receiving” of Him, into the world, in order to live His life… He in us, and us in Him.

It is a challenge that takes everything we’ve got, in order to trust in Him and overcome temptations!

 

[JMM1957]

I qualified with the term “sacramental”, not “any sphere”…

I do not see the gift of transubstantiating listed with His giftings.

Agree that we are placed in His body, the ecclesia the church and are not an island unto ourselves. But again,was only bringing who can and who can not preside over a communion.

Blessings

God causes the transformation, not the priest.