Since you seem pretty hung up on my post that Eastern Catholics use leavened bread, I will agree with TexanKnight that your using this fact to say that you can use ordinary bread and water is in fact a Red Herring Argument.
That of course is not correct, because I have
not brought up Eastern Catholic practice to therefore say that we can use “ordinary bread”. I brought up Eastern Catholic practice because TexanKnight argued that Jesus “said” to use
unleavened bread, and was criticizing Latter-day Saint practice because we don’t do what Jesus “said” to do, according to TexanKnight. I subsequently brought up Eastern Catholics to show that his argument was invalid because the standard he is holding Latter-day Saints to (i.e. we are not using unleavened bread as Jesus “said” to do) also condemns part of his own Church. Therefore, red herring is not a valid critique.
Also, I am really not hung up on your post about Eastern Catholics, since I do believe that I brought up the issue in relation to TexanKnight’s fallacious argument before you clarified for another poster what I was talking about.
But to the point at hand: the bread used in the Eucharist, East and West, is made with simple ingredients: ONLY wheat and water (and leaven in the East). Any other ingredients make the Eucharist not only illicit but invalid.
As in the Passover, Christ used bread with ONLY wheat and water, therefore the Church has said that bread with ONLY wheat and water is allowed (with East including leaven to symbolize the risen Christ. However, they will not add any other ingredients).
Right, I am aware. Interestingly, as I’m sure you’re aware, leaven would not be added to the bread used in the Passover seder, so your sentence beginning “As in the Passover” only applies to the Latin Catholic practice, and not the Eastern.
As in the Passover, Christ used WINE, therefore the Church has said that wine is ONLY allowed, not grape juice, not water, not Pepsi, but alcoholic wine.
Any deviation from this is not only illicit but invalid.
Right, I am aware. Latter-day Saints believe that further revelation has been provided by the Lord on the matter. Interestingly, a few ancient Jewish Christian groups, such as the Nazarenes and Ebionites abstained from wine, and used water in their Eucharistic celebrations.
However, as an LDS, this argument is more like a modern Evangelical Protestant with the argument of “Christ also said that He’s a door and meant that symbolically, therefore the bread is also symbolic.” That is forgetting that Paul warns partaking in the Eucharist unworthily as in
Corinthians.Why give such a warning if the Eucharist is merely a symbol?
Perhaps you may want to ask the “modern Evangelical Protestants” who believe that it is “merely a symbol”. While Latter-day Saints do not believe the bread and water turn into the actual flesh and blood of Jesus Christ, we also don’t believe that the bread and water are merely symbols. Firstly, our Sacrament prayers specifically ask God to “bless and sanctify” the bread and water. We believe that partaking of the bread and water renews our covenants (and is itself a sacred covenant), and invites the Holy Ghost to be with us. Because we take the Sacrament so seriously because of what it is and what it does (Latter-day Saints believe that our sacred ordinances actually “do” something, and aren’t just symbols), worthiness is important (and is important in all of our ordinances). Repentance should take place before partaking, serious sins should be confessed to one’s bishop, and one should refrain from partaking if they find themselves unworthy. Therefore, we completely agree with Paul.
Did Christ not take bread, but a
few chapters earlier said that He “is the bread that has come down from Heaven” and that “His flesh is true food” and “unless we eat His flesh and drink His blood, we have no life in us,” only to say that the bread He was holding He proclaimed “This is my Body?”
This doesn’t sound symbolic to me…
Nor has it ever, but
don’t just take my word for it.
I agree with all of what Christ said. I’m sure you’re aware of alternative interpretations of how our Savior’s flesh is real food, as well as how we can eat His flesh and drink His blood without holding to the belief that the bread and wine turn into body and blood while appearing to be bread and wine. Also, yes, Christ is the bread come down from Heaven, but I assume that you don’t believe that Christ is literally bread, since you believe that the bread is no longer bread, but is the body of Christ.
