Is belief in communion as a symbol a sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rcwitness
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rcwitness

Guest
I grew up evangelical free and converted to Catholicism. The more I learn about the Catholic Eucharist, the more I wonder about how God views the doctrine of the Bread and Cup of the new covenent being only a symbol. On one hand I don’t think all people practicing this communion are held to the same blameworthyness. But as a doctrine, it seems more sacriligious than authentic faith. By sacriligious I mean, if it is only a symbol, then we created something (bread and wine) to represent him (an image) that we use to worship him (eat not as regular food, but blessed). Im not trying to believe this, but don’t see how it can be an option. Isn’t it either the Holy Spirit creates it and it is pure to eat, or we created it and should not say it represents God? So, is it right to tell them it is a sin (of course in a loving and non judgemental way) to say the bread and wine are only symbols?

Thanks,
Michael
 
I grew up evangelical free and converted to Catholicism. The more I learn about the Catholic Eucharist, the more I wonder about how God views the doctrine of the Bread and Cup of the new covenent being only a symbol. On one hand I don’t think all people practicing this communion are held to the same blameworthyness. But as a doctrine, it seems more sacriligious than authentic faith. By sacriligious I mean, if it is only a symbol, then we created something (bread and wine) to represent him (an image) that we use to worship him (eat not as regular food, but blessed). Im not trying to believe this, but don’t see how it can be an option. Isn’t it either the Holy Spirit creates it and it is pure to eat, or we created it and should not say it represents God? So, is it right to tell them it is a sin (of course in a loving and non judgemental way) to say the bread and wine are only symbols?

Thanks,
Michael
 
rcwitness said:
I grew up evangelical free and converted to Catholicism. The more I learn about the Catholic Eucharist, the more I wonder about how God views the doctrine of the Bread and Cup of the new covenent being only a symbol. On one hand I don’t think all people practicing this communion are held to the same blameworthyness. But as a doctrine, it seems more sacriligious than authentic faith. By sacriligious I mean, if it is only a symbol, then we created something (bread and wine) to represent him (an image) that we use to worship him (eat not as regular food, but blessed). Im not trying to believe this, but don’t see how it can be an option. Isn’t it either the Holy Spirit creates it and it is pure to eat, or we created it and should not say it represents God? So, is it right to tell them it is a sin (of course in a loving and non judgemental way) to say the bread and wine are only symbols?

Thanks,
Michael
Click to expand...
No, its not a sin… In the early Church, the clergy allowed many of the faithful to assume that the Eucharist was only symbolic. The reasons they did it were to protect the Church from persecution, and because at that time, it was too radical, and a lot of people weren’t ready for that knowledge…

As its been put to me, you don’t feed a baby meat at first, you wait until the baby is ready, then you feed it meat… Or something like that. 😃

…likewise, there are some who are not yet mature enough in there faith today to understand.
 
rcwitness said:
I grew up evangelical free and converted to Catholicism. The more I learn about the Catholic Eucharist, the more I wonder about how God views the doctrine of the Bread and Cup of the new covenent being only a symbol. On one hand I don’t think all people practicing this communion are held to the same blameworthyness. But as a doctrine, it seems more sacriligious than authentic faith. By sacriligious I mean, if it is only a symbol, then we created something (bread and wine) to represent him (an image) that we use to worship him (eat not as regular food, but blessed). Im not trying to believe this, but don’t see how it can be an option. Isn’t it either the Holy Spirit creates it and it is pure to eat, or we created it and should not say it represents God? So, is it right to tell them it is a sin (of course in a loving and non judgemental way) to say the bread and wine are only symbols?

Thanks,
Michael
Click to expand...
welcome to the forums micheal:)
The bread and wine are not re-created by the Holy Spirit. It is the substance that is changed not created.
There are many that hold to the symbolic communion, and of these many will not bow down to the bread as if it were God.So in this case these really don’t beleive the bread represents God so it can’t be sacreligious.

Where there is knowledge there is sin. This knowledge is akin to the knowledge of 1t1=2…
If they know that there comunion is false then they are committing a sin. Otherwise they are mislead without true knowldege.
 
rcwitness said:
I grew up evangelical free and converted to Catholicism. The more I learn about the Catholic Eucharist, the more I wonder about how God views the doctrine of the Bread and Cup of the new covenent being only a symbol. On one hand I don’t think all people practicing this communion are held to the same blameworthyness. But as a doctrine, it seems more sacriligious than authentic faith. By sacriligious I mean, if it is only a symbol, then we created something (bread and wine) to represent him (an image) that we use to worship him (eat not as regular food, but blessed). Im not trying to believe this, but don’t see how it can be an option. Isn’t it either the Holy Spirit creates it and it is pure to eat, or we created it and should not say it represents God? So, is it right to tell them it is a sin (of course in a loving and non judgemental way) to say the bread and wine are only symbols?

Thanks,
Michael
Click to expand...
But “we” didn’t create anything. Jesus himself said “do this in remembrance.” So how can people who are obeying Jesus by doing what he said to do committing sacrilege?
 
TEPO said:
No, its not a sin… In the early Church, the clergy allowed many of the faithful to assume that the Eucharist was only symbolic. The reasons they did it were to protect the Church from persecution, and because at that time, it was too radical, and a lot of people weren’t ready for that knowledge…

As its been put to me, you don’t feed a baby meat at first, you wait until the baby is ready, then you feed it meat… Or something like that. 😃

…likewise, there are some who are not yet mature enough in there faith today to understand.
Click to expand...
Well, I do hope this is true. And that the Lord blesses them through it. I can easily understand the difficulty in belief it is truly our Lord’s flesh and blood. But its one thing to say, “I’m not sure, so I’ll believe its a symbol” and another to say, “It can only be a symbol”
 
fbl9 said:
welcome to the forums micheal:)
The bread and wine are not re-created by the Holy Spirit. It is the substance that is changed not created.
There are many that hold to the symbolic communion, and of these many will not bow down to the bread as if it were God.So in this case these really don’t beleive the bread represents God so it can’t be sacreligious.

Where there is knowledge there is sin. This knowledge is akin to the knowledge of 1t1=2…
If they know that there comunion is false then they are committing a sin. Otherwise they are mislead without true knowldege.
Click to expand...
Thanks Bro,
I thought about that after I submittet the question. I do understand He is not re-created. So thanks for that correction.🙂 And thanks for the welcome.
God Bless
 
ltwin said:
But “we” didn’t create anything. Jesus himself said “do this in remembrance.” So how can people who are obeying Jesus by doing what he said to do committing sacrilege?
Click to expand...
He bro! I kinda made a mistake. I put this thread in two places. the other being in apologetics. I got a couple good answers. And was comforted that it is not sinful. My question was more in the line of is the interpretaion of symbolism put into practice and teaching sinful. I agree with a response that it is not worship. Or at least I hope it is not worship for those believing it is only a symbol.

Peace,
Michael
 
Hi RC,

From the Council of Trent :
****CANON I.-If any one denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue; let him be anathema. ****
Click to expand...
http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct13.html

I am astounded that some of the answers are skirting around this. If you deny the Real Presence, you are committing a sin against faith and are putting yourself outside of the Church. Jesus is saying, “Will you also leave me?” as he said to his apostles after many disciples left him following his statement on eating his flesh and drinking lhis blood.

We are not expected or obliged to understand all the tenets of our faith, but we are obliged to accept them; this is the submission of our mind to God’s revelation. Many have suffered martyrdom for affirming their belief in the Real Presence. Don’t be a half-baked believer.

Verbum

PS Catholic Answers has a good article on the subject : catholic.com/tracts/the-real-presence
 
Verbum said:
Hi RC,

From the Council of Trent :

http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct13.html

I am astounded that some of the answers are skirting around this. If you deny the Real Presence, you are committing a sin against faith and are putting yourself outside of the Church. Jesus is saying, “Will you also leave me?” as he said to his apostles after many disciples left him following his statement on eating his flesh and drinking lhis blood.

We are not expected or obliged to understand all the tenets of our faith, but we are obliged to accept them; this is the submission of our mind to God’s revelation. Many have suffered martyrdom for affirming their belief in the Real Presence. Don’t be a half-baked believer.

Verbum
Click to expand...
This quote applies to Catholics not non-catholics.
 
ltwin said:
But “we” didn’t create anything.

You are right here also. I should have used the word “make” as in matter from earth and the work of our hands. And “Do this in rememberence of me” isn’t a contradiction to His words of concecration and blessing, “This is my body”.
But I didn’t want to debate what we believe, but curious if what is believed by symbolism is offensive to God. And I was given opinions it isn’t. And I tend to agree.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, it would definately be sin for me to deny catholic teaching. But I do not. I personaly don’t see how someone can believe something Jesusl blesses in not changed. But those who have not become Catholics could be practicing their belief in the symbol and not be an offense to God. But I guess it all becomes personal as to how much they are rejecting what the Lord is telling them…?
 
rcwitness said:
Yes, it would definately be sin for me to deny catholic teaching. But I do not. I personaly don’t see how someone can believe something Jesusl blesses in not changed. But those who have not become Catholics could be practicing their belief in the symbol and not be an offense to God. But I guess it all becomes personal as to how much they are rejecting what the Lord is telling them…?
Click to expand...
and this is what we do not know. That is is why we can not say their beleif/practices are sinful.
 
Verbum said:
Hi RC,

From the Council of Trent :

http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct13.html

I am astounded that some of the answers are skirting around this. If you deny the Real Presence, you are committing a sin against faith and are putting yourself outside of the Church. Jesus is saying, “Will you also leave me?” as he said to his apostles after many disciples left him following his statement on eating his flesh and drinking lhis blood.

We are not expected or obliged to understand all the tenets of our faith, but we are obliged to accept them; this is the submission of our mind to God’s revelation. Many have suffered martyrdom for affirming their belief in the Real Presence. Don’t be a half-baked believer.

Verbum

PS Catholic Answers has a good article on the subject : catholic.com/tracts/the-real-presence
Click to expand...
This is correct.
 
As St. Paul says in 1st Corinthians chapter 11 verses 23-29…

For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes. Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.

The red is added by me (the words of Jesus Christ), the underline and bold are mine, also.

There is no way after reading this that I (myself) could deny the “Real Presence”. Would a man have to answer for the Body and Blood of the Lord if the bread and wine were only symbols? Personally, I don’t think so. From This passage, it sounds to me like it would be a sin to accept the Eucharist as a symbol. I would also strenuously recommend you re-read the Gospel of John chapter six.

It often amazes me how few Christians (Roman Catholics, other Catholic rites, Orthodox, and Protestants) even know this passage exists!

I’m going to assume you hold the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God; and assuming that… I think that anyone who reads this passage would have to seriously reconsider the notion of symbolism. If we worship an invisible Man who lives in the sky; one God in three Persons; a Savior who was born to a virgin woman; a Savior who rose from the dead and was lifted bodilly into Heaven; and MANY other miricles…; how can we mere mortals deny that the God who can make ALL these many miracles happen; can’t (or wouldn’t) change bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ?

I truly think Jesus was VERY clear in the Gospel of John that the Eucharist is NOT symbolic, and I think St. Paul was VERY clear in 1st Corinthians that the Eucharist is NOT symbolic, and to accept it as such is indeed sinful.

It is for you to accept or deny, but I just wanted to throw in my own two cents. Good luck, my friend. My your studies continue, and you have my respect for coming here and asking the question.
 
TEPO said:
No, its not a sin… In the early Church, the clergy allowed many of the faithful to assume that the Eucharist was only symbolic. The reasons they did it were to protect the Church from persecution, and because at that time, it was too radical, and a lot of people weren’t ready for that knowledge…

As its been put to me, you don’t feed a baby meat at first, you wait until the baby is ready, then you feed it meat… Or something like that. 😃

…likewise, there are some who are not yet mature enough in there faith today to understand.
Click to expand...
St. Paul reprimanded Christians who received communion unworthily, without discerning the Body of the Lord. 1 Cor 11:27,29. The reason why one can only receive Holy Communion at the age of reason is probably to be able to recognize the real presence prior to receiving it. If not, it would be like feeding the body of Christ to a cat which did not know what it ate. The belief in the Real Presence primarily requires faith, not understanding. I don’t know if it was indeed tolerated by some of the clergy in the early Church, but St. Paul had strong words for them, saying that it’s sinful.

As for the original topic, if the communion isn’t valid (that is, the bread has not really turned into the Body of our Lord because the priest is not validly ordained or that the intention was merely to make communion merely symbolic), it’s probably not sacrilege. Another point to consider is whether this stems from ignorance and whether this ignorance is invincible or culpable.
 
rcwitness said:
So, is it right to tell them it is a sin (of course in a loving and non judgemental way) to say the bread and wine are only symbols?
Click to expand...
Yes, Catholics who believe the Eucharist is **only **a symbol incur automatic excommunication (see previous quote of Trent, for example).
TEPO said:
No, its not a sin… In the early Church, the clergy allowed many of the faithful to assume that the Eucharist was only symbolic. The reasons they did it were to protect the Church from persecution, and because at that time, it was too radical, and a lot of people weren’t ready for that knowledge…
Click to expand...
Source?

St. Ignatius, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans: “[The heretics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ.”

St. Justin Martyr, The First Apology 66: “And this food is called among us the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.”

St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies book 4, chapter 17: “He took that created thing, bread, and gave thanks, and said, “This is My body.” And the cup likewise, which is part of that creation to which we belong, He confessed to be His blood.”

Against Heresies book 4, chapter 18: [T]he bread over which thanks have been given is the body of [our] Lord, and the cup His blood.

Et cetera.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top