In ~rememberance~ of Me?

[STIOFAN]

David Brent:

What Paul is saying is that when you approach communion in an unworthy manner by gorging yourself at the expense of those with nothing or you get drunk (or otherwise focusing only on yourself and your own desires), you are not honoring the sacrifice that the Lord has made for you which is the focus of the Last Supper remembrance. Communion is a time to show the Lord the appropriate reverance He deserves for the sacrifice He made for you.

Who told you that, is this your own interpation or what others have told you ?
Is “gorging yourself at the expense of those with nothing or you get drunk etc” where can I find this in the Bible ? chapter and verse please.

 

[Church_Militant]

STIOFÁN:

Who told you that, is this your own interpation or what others have told you ?
Is “gorging yourself at the expense of those with nothing or you get drunk etc” where can I find this in the Bible ? chapter and verse please.

He’s wrong, STIOFÁN:
1st Corinthians 11:23-30

"23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.

26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. 27 Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 30 Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep. "

That was a problem in Corinth. Still as I’ve said before it’s impossible to become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord if it’s only there in symbol. Abuse of any symbol does not commute onto the person itself (the idea is sort of dumb IMO) The person would have to be truly present in order for one to become guilty of the Body and blood of the Lord.
Pax tecum,

 

[STIOFAN]

Church Militant:

That was a problem in Corinth. Still as I’ve said before it’s impossible to become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord if it’s only there in symbol. Abuse of any symbol does not commute onto the person itself (the idea is sort of dumb IMO) The person would have to be truly present in order for one to become guilty of the Body and blood of the Lord.
Pax tecum,

True CM, and if we were invited to supper, why would we not drink from our own cup, and stretch and take our own bread.
What was special about what Jesus was passing around ? it would be weird to say the least to sit at a table with 12 others, and only one cup and dish.
Also I read this somewhere, and I’m going to a birthday party now 2120 hrs , but maybe you can check for me.
Doesn’t it say " and while they were eating, He took bread blessed it and broke it etc;
If they were eating, why would Jesus pass around more ?

Ok bye !

 

[JGC]

David Brent:

Whatever a priest or pastor might share in a homily or sermon or a book should be checked against the Bible, not doctrinal volumes. .

If you ask a group of protestants about most doctrines, you will get different answers. E.G.

Prescence in communion ladies and gentlemen?

Lutheran - Consubstantiation - body and blood and bread and wine
Catholic - Body and blood
Orthodox - Body and Blood
Anglican I - Some sort of real prescence
Anglican II - Symbolic only
Anglican III - Body and blood
Presbyterian I - Symbolic only
Presbyterian II - Dynamic presence
Baptist - Symbolic only

etc etc

The Catholic and Orthodox CHurches, due to Apostolic succesion and Authority maintained the Apostolic faith for 1600 years until individuals came along and said Scripture could be interpreted personally.

400 years later, thousands of denominations later and more positions on most issues than you would believe.

Sorry, the Bible is not self interpreting.

(((((
St. Vincent of Lerins, writing c.434, soon after St. Augustine’s death, makes the same point about the necessity of Church authority and interpretation, since,

. . . quite plainly, Sacred Scripture, by reason of its own depth, is not accepted by everyone as having one and the same meaning . . . it can almost appear as if there are as many opinions as there are men. (14) Thus, all the essential components of the Catholic view of Scripture and Tradition are in place within the first 400 years of the Church’s existence, and this was the unanimous Christian view until the time of the rise of Protestantism in the 16th century. The constant Catholic teaching was strongly reaffirmed and presented even more explicitly in the Council of Trent in 1546 (15) and the Second Vatican Council in 1965. (16)

web.archive.org/web/20030604071746/http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ429.HTM

 

[David_Brent]

Church Militant:

He’s wrong, STIOFÁN:
1st Corinthians 11:23-30

"23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.

26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. 27 Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 30 Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep. "

That was a problem in Corinth. Still as I’ve said before it’s impossible to become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord if it’s only there in symbol. Abuse of any symbol does not commute onto the person itself (the idea is sort of dumb IMO) The person would have to be truly present in order for one to become guilty of the Body and blood of the Lord.
Pax tecum,

I simply disagree. Given the command to “do this in remembrance” at the Last Supper, it is wrong to cheapen the communion service by engaging in such selfish behavior in the midst of it.

 

[David_Brent]

STIOFÁN:

Who told you that, is this your own interpation or what others have told you ?
Is “gorging yourself at the expense of those with nothing or you get drunk etc” where can I find this in the Bible ? chapter and verse please.

The information was from a Bible Study series by William Barclay. The one to which I was referring was on 1 and 2 Corinthians.

There is context to these letters that Paul and Peter and James et al. wrote. Considering the context provides insight into what is written on the pages.

I think anyone who has written a letter understands that you can’t put everything in a letter that informs what you are putting to paper.

It would be great if Paul had had email so we could see what it was that Paul was responding to exactly, and we could follow the thread of messages back and forth.

 

[STIOFAN]

David Brent:

The information was from a Bible Study series by William Barclay. The one to which I was referring was on 1 and 2 Corinthians.

Sorry for brow beating you, I was just having a go as we say here in Ireland.
The reason was when Catholics are asked to prove where it is in the Bible well, we get a bad press.

 

[Church_Militant]

David Brent:

I simply disagree. Given the command to “do this in remembrance” at the Last Supper, it is wrong to cheapen the communion service by engaging in such selfish behavior in the midst of it.

My point is that if there is no real presence, then Paul is in dire error about becoming guilty of His body and blood. Saying this is symbolic makes Paul’s statements nonsense.

 

[hlgomez]

The Lord is available to everyone who comes after He dwelled among us through the Holy Spirit, not a communion wafer. Life comes by believing in God, not by partaking in communion.

David Brent,

Based on your understanding, it seems that you don’t really understand what communion is in the light of Christ’s revelation. You have exchanged your ideas that of relativist positions among protestants. Everyone claims to have his interpretation to be true–even if it contradicts with the other–and claims to have the holy Spirit. What a great contradiction of truth to suit their appetites! If life comes from believing in God, then why is the devil still a devil? The devil believes that Christ is Lord!

The Church from the very beginning was sacramental–and is always be. You can flip the pages of the early christian writings and see for yourself if your views are in line with the early church, especially in regard to communion.

The Eucharist is not a communion wafer. That’s why your views get distorted and become seriously erroneous because you think that it is only a wafer. But catholics, even the ealry christians who, by the way, were catholics, view it, and have faith, that it is truly the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. After the consecration of the priest, this bread and wine is transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ–Real Body and Real Blood–not mere symbols.

St. Paul very well said it in his letter to the Corinthian faithful–he said; “Whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.” If then it is only a “wafer” as what you think it is, then why are you going to be answerable for the body and blood of the Lord? And he adds: “For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgement on himself.” (1 Cor 11:27-29)

I pray that you open wide the doors to Christ. He will not take away anything that is good from you-only those that are bad–and erroneous interpretation of the Gospels. Be open to the Truth–the absolute Truth–Jesus Christ. In Him there is no swerving to the left nor swerving to the right and often times making “truth” become subjective just to suit ones belief. Many protestants have fallen into very serious errors. Go back to the one, holy catholic and apostolic church. She alone was tasked to preserve the true doctrines intact without any compromise.

God bless.

Pio

 

[David_Brent]

hlgomez:

David Brent,

Based on your understanding, it seems that you don’t really understand what communion is in the light of Christ’s revelation. You have exchanged your ideas that of relativist positions among protestants. Everyone claims to have his interpretation to be true–even if it contradicts with the other–and claims to have the holy Spirit. What a great contradiction of truth to suit their appetites! If life comes from believing in God, then why is the devil still a devil? The devil believes that Christ is Lord!

The Church from the very beginning was sacramental–and is always be. You can flip the pages of the early christian writings and see for yourself if your views are in line with the early church, especially in regard to communion.

The Eucharist is not a communion wafer. That’s why your views get distorted and become seriously erroneous because you think that it is only a wafer. But catholics, even the ealry christians who, by the way, were catholics, view it, and have faith, that it is truly the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. After the consecration of the priest, this bread and wine is transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ–Real Body and Real Blood–not mere symbols.

St. Paul very well said it in his letter to the Corinthian faithful–he said; “Whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.” If then it is only a “wafer” as what you think it is, then why are you going to be answerable for the body and blood of the Lord? And he adds: “For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgement on himself.” (1 Cor 11:27-29)

I pray that you open wide the doors to Christ. He will not take away anything that is good from you-only those that are bad–and erroneous interpretation of the Gospels. Be open to the Truth–the absolute Truth–Jesus Christ. In Him there is no swerving to the left nor swerving to the right and often times making “truth” become subjective just to suit ones belief. Many protestants have fallen into very serious errors. Go back to the one, holy catholic and apostolic church. She alone was tasked to preserve the true doctrines intact without any compromise.

God bless.

Pio

Pio,

Thanks for the concern. I am open to the Truth as you say. I know Who the Truth is. There is nothing relative about the Christ in Whom I believe or about my belief.

As for the devil believing – James talks about faith without works when he discusses the demons believing in God to emphasize the importance of living a life that reflects the faith one professes to have. That is, if one truly has faith, his or her actions (deeds or works) will reflect that – indeed, must reflect that. The demons know Who God is, but that knowledge means nothing when their deeds work only to destroy.

Satan is still Satan because he chooses to be. He had the choice to do what he wanted to do rather than submit to God’s authority and that’s what he chose to do.

 

[hlgomez]

There is nothing relative about the Christ in Whom I believe or about my belief.

There is a fundamental difference in “believing what you believe” and believing in “what had been handed down from the Apostles.”

Since you have said that you are “open to the truth”, then I challenge your “openness” to dig-in more deeply thru Church history and see if what you believe right now about Christ and His Church is what had been handed down and received by the early century Christians dating from the 1st to the 5th centuries. But most especially the 1st and 2nd century because they were the people who heard the apostles preached and that their voices still rung in their ears. They were the ones who vigilantly safeguarded the faith so that the succeeding generations may preach the same Gospel that they have received from the apostles without error.

You can easily p(name removed by moderator)oint the fundamental difference of what the Protestants believe and what the early Church believe thru the writings of the early Church Fathers. You can dig-in more information here: www.ccel.org/fathers

Again, that’s my challenge if you are truly open to the truth.

God bless.

Pio