Mike Gendron attacks Eucharistic Adoration

[Trebor135]

Thank you, yes, I found this helpful. Scripture doesn’t explain the difference, so I guess that means the authors thought it should be obvious.

I like your idea of the ‘foretaste’ of Jesus’ return. That makes sense to me, and it helps make sense of the apparent ‘contradiction’ in the ideas that Christ is yet to return, but also that He’s present on earth in the Eucharist.

I agree. The Holy Spirit is another example where, before its official expected “arrival” in the world, one person of the trinity is active down here:

Luke 1:13-15: [13] But the angel said to him, “Do not be afraid, Zechari’ah, for your prayer is heard, and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John.
[14] And you will have joy and gladness,
and many will rejoice at his birth;
[15] for he will be great before the Lord,
and he shall drink no wine nor strong drink,
and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit,
even from his mother’s womb.”

John 1:32-34: [32] And John bore witness, “I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him.
[33] I myself did not know him; but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, `He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’
[34] And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.”

John 16:7-11: [7] “Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.
[8] And when he comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment:
[9] concerning sin, because they do not believe in me;
[10] concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no more;
[11] concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.”

Acts 2:1-4: [1] When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place.
[2] And suddenly a sound came from heaven like the rush of a mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
[3] And there appeared to them tongues as of fire, distributed and resting on each one of them.
[4] And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

 

[Miriam1947]

Great thread.

 

[Kotton]

Some of the biggest lies I’ve heard about the Catholic Church have come from ex Catholics, the absolute biggest being “the Catholic Church never taught me that Christ rose from the dead”.

This is very common on message boards where the Catholics are called ‘pagans’, ‘satanists’, ‘idol worshipers’, etc. I even read it once from a suposedly ‘former priest’.

…the most common lie being “Catholics worship Mary.”

If I hear either of those two accusations from an ex Catholic, I KNOW I’m dealing with an intentional liar.

Mary ‘worship’ is often proclaimed by those who never developed beyond child mentality. Then we have those who had their ears pluged, missed catechism on days that was taught, or

 

[jediliz]

***There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church. - Fulton Sheen

To be deep in history is to Cease to be Protestant - John Henry Newman

*Isn’t this the guy that John Martigoni is often debating?

All of us face judgement day, some may get a harsher look than others.

**

 

[benaiah]

Of course he’s way out of whack here. We know that The Eucharist IS Scriptural and he really needs to get out his time machine and go back and explain that to the Early Church Fathers like Ignatius of Antioch who plainly told the church at Smyrna…Nicely snatched right out of context, since this speaks of to an entirely different context. Again though, we have St. Paul saying the following about the Eucharist. [bibledrb]1 Corinthians 11:23-30[/bibledrb]Let me know when Fr, O’Brien is declared an infallible source, okay? In 1938 this may have been the way he explained this. I don’t know because I don’t have this book and can’t find the context of this quote online. However, the way it is explained is actually. The Institution of the MassHere Gendron pulls a reference in the CCC out of context (along with the passage from Fr. O’Brien above) and uses it to misrepresent authentic Catholic teaching. Look here at paragraph 1375 of the Catechism. (Emphasis mine)
So here again Mike Gendron blatantly misrepresents Catholic teaching to try to make his case.
(Cont’d)

Hello,
I do believe you are quoting 1 Cor. 11:23-27 out of context. Re-read what Paul wrote from verse 17 to 22 :

17 Now this I ordain: not praising you, that you come together not for the better, but for the worse.

18 For first of all I hear that when you come together in the church, there are schisms among you; and in part I believe it.

19 For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you.

20 When you come therefore together into one place, it is not now to eat the Lord’s supper.

21 For every one taketh before his own supper to eat. And one indeed is hungry and another is drunk.

22 What, have you not houses to eat and to drink in? Or despise ye the church of God; and put them to shame that have not? What shall I say to you? Do I praise you? In this I praise you not.

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.

The context is, that some believers were coming together with the intent of having dinner because they were hungry. It didn’t have anything to do with the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation. Be careful when accusing someone of being “out of context” when you clearly were here.
Peace,
Benaiah

 

[wanner47]

Hello,
I do believe you are quoting 1 Cor. 11:23-27 out of context. Re-read what Paul wrote from verse 17 to 22 :

17 Now this I ordain: not praising you, that you come together not for the better, but for the worse.

18 For first of all I hear that when you come together in the church, there are schisms among you; and in part I believe it.

19 For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you.

20 When you come therefore together into one place, it is not now to eat the Lord’s supper.

21 For every one taketh before his own supper to eat. And one indeed is hungry and another is drunk.

22 What, have you not houses to eat and to drink in? Or despise ye the church of God; and put them to shame that have not? What shall I say to you? Do I praise you? In this I praise you not.

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.

The context is, that some believers were coming together with the intent of having dinner because they were hungry. It didn’t have anything to do with the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation. Be careful when accusing someone of being “out of context” when you clearly were here.
Peace,
Benaiah

Actually, Benaiah, I think you’re the one doing the misinterpreting here. If we go by your interpretation, Paul is saying that"he that eateth and drinketh unworthily" of his own, everyday, commonplace supper “eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.”

That doesn’t make sense. How can one ingest nourishment unworthily? If someone eats and drinks judgement upon himself, it seems obvious that there must be some spiritual dimension to whatever he is eating and drinking, which isn’t the case with one’s typical supper meal.

 

[gtrenewed]

The subject of the thread is Eucharistic Adoration. Of course the theology of the Lords Supper comes into play but it doesn’t necessarily have to and I would ask:

1. where in Scripture or early church Tradition do we find Eucharistic Adoration?;
2. when did the modern form of Eucharistic Adoration start since I don’t remember this from my youth in the 50’s and 60’s when I served as an altar boy?
3. meditation on the Eucharist is very different from Eucharistic Adoration as an event(for lack of better word). Can’t one believe in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist and think that the event of Euchatistic Adoration is “over the top” even though it seems a logical extension?
4. in John 3:14 Jesus says that “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;” Moses was commanded by God to forge a golden serpent on a pole and lift it up in front of Israel and all who gazed upon it would be healed of the poisonous serpent bite. Eventually in the time of the Judges, certain of Israel were displaying the pole and worshipping it. They found out that they had taken this too far. Have we taken it too far?

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

The subject of the thread is Eucharistic Adoration. Of course the theology of the Lords Supper comes into play but it doesn’t necessarily have to and I would ask:

1. where in Scripture or early church Tradition do we find Eucharistic Adoration?;
2. when did the modern form of Eucharistic Adoration start since I don’t remember this from my youth in the 50’s and 60’s when I served as an altar boy?
3. meditation on the Eucharist is very different from Eucharistic Adoration as an event(for lack of better word). Can’t one believe in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist and think that the event of Euchatistic Adoration is “over the top” even though it seems a logical extension?
4. in John 3:14 Jesus says that “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;” Moses was commanded by God to forge a golden serpent on a pole and lift it up in front of Israel and all who gazed upon it would be healed of the poisonous serpent bite. Eventually in the time of the Judges, certain of Israel were displaying the pole and worshipping it. They found out that they had taken this too far. Have we taken it too far?

Is the Eucharist God or not?

 

[wanner47]

The subject of the thread is Eucharistic Adoration. Of course the theology of the Lords Supper comes into play but it doesn’t necessarily have to and I would ask:

1. where in Scripture or early church Tradition do we find Eucharistic Adoration?;
2. when did the modern form of Eucharistic Adoration start since I don’t remember this from my youth in the 50’s and 60’s when I served as an altar boy?
3. meditation on the Eucharist is very different from Eucharistic Adoration as an event(for lack of better word). Can’t one believe in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist and think that the event of Euchatistic Adoration is “over the top” even though it seems a logical extension?
4. in John 3:14 Jesus says that “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;” Moses was commanded by God to forge a golden serpent on a pole and lift it up in front of Israel and all who gazed upon it would be healed of the poisonous serpent bite. Eventually in the time of the Judges, certain of Israel were displaying the pole and worshipping it. They found out that they had taken this too far. Have we taken it too far?

1. Scripture and early Church tradition; in addition, Eucharistic miracles have been documented very early in Church history.
2. If the parishioners WEREN’T adoring the Eucharist at every single Mass, then something was horribly wrong in the parishes you served in as a boy.
3. Depends on what you mean by “over the top.” Can worship of Christ ever be “over the top”?
4. The serpent was not God. The Eucharist is. BIG difference.

 

[gtrenewed]

1. Scripture and early Church tradition; in addition, Eucharistic miracles have been documented very early in Church history.
2. If the parishioners WEREN’T adoring the Eucharist at every single Mass, then something was horribly wrong in the parishes you served in as a boy.
3. Depends on what you mean by “over the top.” Can worship of Christ ever be “over the top”?
4. The serpent was not God. The Eucharist is. BIG difference.

1. Your links prove the real presence, to which I agree, but not to Eucharistic Adoration outside of mass.
2. Your argument talks past the topic. At mass, in our hearts is one thing but there was never a formal, separate time apart from mass.
3. Just ask the detractors of the Charismatic Renewal, they think there can be. As for this discussion, I can worship Christ alone in a dark room. My question is the progression from believing in the real presence to worshipping an object going too far?
4. True but it was in obedience to God’s command as the Eucharist is in obedience to Jesus’ command. The command was to eat body and drink blood, not to hold them up in worship.

 

[gtrenewed]

Is the Eucharist God or not?

Yes, but you did not answer any of my other questions. Did the early church do this or did they eat the Body and Blood of our Lord in response to His command to take and eat and drink. He never said to sit and look at it and worship it.

 

[wanner47]

1. Your links prove the real presence, to which I agree, but not to Eucharistic Adoration outside of mass.

Do you believe that it is only appropriate to worship God in the context of the Mass?

1. Your argument talks past the topic. At mass, in our hearts is one thing but there was never a formal, separate time apart from mass.

See above.

1. Just ask the detractors of the Charismatic Renewal, they think there can be. As for this discussion, I can worship Christ alone in a dark room. My question is the progression from believing in the real presence to worshipping an object going too far?

Eucharist Adoration is NOT ‘worship of an object.’ Such an act would be a violation of the second commandment. Eucharist Adoration is worship of God, regardless of when and where it takes place.

1. True but it was in obedience to God’s command as the Eucharist is in obedience to Jesus’ command. The command was to eat body and drink blood, not to hold them up in worship.

The first commandment tells us to worship God. Jesus told us to follow the commandments. The Eucharist is God. Ergo, Jesus told us to worship God, who is present in the Eucharist.

By your logic, Jesus never told us to celebrate the Eucharist within the context of the Mass, so that must be wrong, too… ?

 

[gtrenewed]

Do you believe that it is only appropriate to worship God in the context of the Mass?

Again, you are talking past my point. We worship 24/7. My question was specific.

Eucharist Adoration is NOT ‘worship of an object.’ Such an act would be a violation of the second commandment. Eucharist Adoration is worship of God, regardless of when and where it takes place.

The first commandment tells us to worship God. Jesus told us to follow the commandments. The Eucharist is God. Ergo, Jesus told us to worship God, who is present in the Eucharist.

By your logic, Jesus never told us to celebrate the Eucharist within the context of the Mass, so that must be wrong, too… ?

You are misquoting me. I said that Jesus said to take and eat and drink and that was reflected in the early church. Can you point me to a reference that shows the early church worshipped the bread and wine outside of mass?

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Have we taken it too far?

To give you a less flippant response… A common desire, particularly among apologetics boards, is to give a pat “proof-text” response. “Show me where in early tradition” etc etc. This is a bit of an irrelevant question, since the Church is the One Body whether now or in the past. One should nt expect to find everything believed in the infancy of the Church exactly as it is today: a clear understanding of a pope, the Assumption of Mary, infallibility, etc. This is not to say that they are any less true, but it seems a massive error to assume that the Gospel was delivered much as the protestant Bible; in one neat package. The mustard seed was planted by Christ, and over the centuries the Holy Spirit has guided Christ’s body in truth as the implications of our spiritual seeds have been pondered upon.

Would Eucharistic adoration have been done in the early centuries? Quite possibly. But to demand the proof of such betrays a somewhat simplistic view of the definition of Dogma. The Eucharist is Christ, and yet the particulars of who exactly Christ was were still being worked out. Should we expect to see the cart before the horse? Should we demand proof of Eucharistic adoration prior to the definition of Christ? We of course know, now, that Jesus is God, and many protestants claim to see it clearly in Scripture, and yet this is a fallacy, it was not always so. We do see the hints; the seeds if you will, of Jesus and the claims He made, such as references the Son of Man, Lord of the Sabbath, etc, and the Church was guided in the truth of declaring such dogmas as the hypostatic union and the Trinity. In the same way, one can see hints, as it were, of Eucharistic adoration in both Scripture and the Fathers, though perhaps not as explicitly as some would like.

For instance, the manna was to be reserved in a jar in Exodus 16. Not so that the Israelites might eat it, but so that they might “see the bread.” The epistle to the Hebrews points out that this Holy Manna was placed inside a golden urn inside the ark itself, which for a Catholic brings it’s own parallels, particularly when exegetically it can be demonstrated that Christ is the new Manna.

The Bread of the Presence has even more striking parallels. For instance, in Exodus 25 God tells Moses to build the table of the “bread of the presence” immediately after the heavenly banquet he took part in with the elders on top of the mountain in Exodus 24, where they “beheld God, and ate and drank.” Interestingly, this bread of the “presence” when translated more literally, amounts to bread of the “face.” So it became apparent that this bread was supposed to be something of a memorial banquet reminiscent of beholding the “face” of God. Also on the table of the presence were flagons for sacrificial drink offerings of wine.Note, in the tabernacle per Leviticus 24:1-4, that a menorah was to always be burning with the bread; it was to be perpetual as the bread was to be a perpetual offering. As a Catholic, the parallels of a candle burning by the host should be immediately apparent.

During the feasts of Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles, Jewish tradition in both the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds states something remarkeable:

“They [the priests] used to lift it [the Golden Table] up and exhibit the Bread of the Presence on it to those who came up for the festivals, saying to them ‘Behold, God’s love for you!’” Babylonian Talmud, Menahoth 29A.

It appears that they showed the Bread of the “Presence/Face” so that they would be honoring Exodus 34, where three times a year each male must see the face of the Lord God. Keeping in mind all these parallels, not to mention that St Cyril explicitly makes this connection of the Eucharist with the Bread of the Presence as well, it is hard not to see the foreshadowings of Eucharistic adoration. Tertullian and St Cyril speak of keeping the host in reserve, which would naturally be the forerunner to such a concept as Adoration. It is said of St Basil of the early 4th century that after giving the Host to himself and the monks, he placed the remainder in a golden dove over the altar. The eastern churches developed the practice sooner than the western churches, most likely due to the fact that they kept the host in reserve in the monasteries, out of which the practice came.

St Augustine states: “He walked here in the same flesh, and gave us the same flesh to be eaten unto salvation. But no one eats that flesh unless he first adores it; and thus it is discovered how such a footstool of the Lord’s feet is adored; and not only do we not sin by adoring, we do sin by not adoring.” –Commentary on Psalms 98:9

So what happens if we don’t consume? Should we not still adore?

He never said to sit and look at it and worship it.

Him. Not “it.”

At the end of the day, Eucharistic Adoration is needed now more than ever, because nothing else forces the believer to so clearly articulate to himself what or who he believes the Eucharist to be. It’s the quickest way to separate a Catholic from an Anglican. If you have a problem with adoration, then the problem may be with what you actually believe about the Eucharist, otherwise idolatry is not an issue. If the Eucharist is God, then we worship properly. If it is not, then we are idolaters. It may be time for some self-reflection on your end.

 

[wanner47]

Again, you are talking past my point. We worship 24/7. My question was specific.

If we worship 24/7, both in and out of Mass, then what’s the problem with Eucharistic Adoration?

You are misquoting me. I said that Jesus said to take and eat and drink and that was reflected in the early church. Can you point me to a reference that shows the early church worshipped the bread and wine outside of mass?

See here for a thorough history of Eucharist Adoration.

Here’s what I don’t understand. If you believe in the Real Presence, why WOULDN’T you want to adore the Eucharist?

 

[David_Carlon]

Gendron is simply another goat, heretic and moron wrapped in the flag and trolling for the weak, ill informed and gullible. It’s only a matter of time before someone snaps a photo of this clown snorting cocaine off the backside of a male prostitute or shemale. I have no sympathy or patience for Satan and his human minions… and do not consider heretics part of the Body of Christ. Enough of this sentimental pap involving heretics who aim to destroy the Catholic Church! Enough of political correctness when it involves heretics who assault our humble, meek and gentle Redeemer and Lord in the Blessed Sacrament!

 

[Jmd96]

Gendron is simply another goat, heretic and moron wrapped in the flag and trolling for the weak, ill informed and gullible. It’s only a matter of time before someone snaps a photo of this clown snorting cocaine off the backside of a male prostitute or shemale. I have no sympathy or patience for Satan and his human minions… and do not consider heretics part of the Body of Christ. Enough of this sentimental pap involving heretics who aim to destroy the Catholic Church! Enough of political correctness when it involves heretics who assault our humble, meek and gentle Redeemer and Lord in the Blessed Sacrament!

**If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing…

Love is patient and kind… It is not arrogant or rude… It is not irritable or resentful…

So faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.**

Your passion for the faith is admirable, friend, but let us not forget charity.

God bless,

 

[Church_Militant]

Hello,
I do believe you are quoting 1 Cor. 11:23-27 out of context. Re-read what Paul wrote from verse 17 to 22 :

17 Now this I ordain: not praising you, that you come together not for the better, but for the worse.18 For first of all I hear that when you come together in the church, there are schisms among you; and in part I believe it.19 For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you.
20 When you come therefore together into one place, it is not now to eat the Lord’s supper.21 For every one taketh before his own supper to eat. And one indeed is hungry and another is drunk.22 What, have you not houses to eat and to drink in? Or despise ye the church of God; and put them to shame that have not? What shall I say to you? Do I praise you? In this I praise you not.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.

The context is, that some believers were coming together with the intent of having dinner because they were hungry. It didn’t have anything to do with the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation. Be careful when accusing someone of being “out of context” when you clearly were here.
Peace,
Benaiah

This is the fairly typical n-C type of commentary, but the real problem for them is that in their gymnastic approach to interpretation http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/corona_stellarum/Smilies/flip_emoticon_jfo.gif they fail to take in to consideration, (or simply choose to ignore I suppose) the context of the rest of the New Testament on this topic, (unlike my blog article The Eucharist IS Scriptural) and so what you have here is the misinterpretation of a single passage without regard for the substantial context of other New Testament scripture. This generally surprises me since it usually comes from some of the same people who will quickly tell you that scripture interprets scripture.

 

[gtrenewed]

To give you a less flippant response…

Are you saying your last response was flippant, I would agree. If you are saying I am being flippant, you judge me incorrectly. I have no use for flippant debate. I have a desire to work out my salvation. If someone put a gun to my head, I would say I believe what the Church teaches. I believe because God put them in charge. If they said defend what the Church teaches, I can’t say that I could defend every point in the catechism and I want to be able. I can defend the real presence through Scripture and Tradition. Other than saying that it is logical that since the Eucharist is God in the Mass, we can sit apart from the Mass and worship this Eucharist as God, I have no reasonable defense.

Our faith and traditions come from the teachings of the Apostles. To see how to carry out these teachings we look to the early church actions since they knew the Apostles. To say that they did not know Jesus as God is clearly contradicted in Scripture directly, i.e. Thomas says my Lord and my God. It may not have been codified in a legal context, but by the Holy Spirit the Apostles knew and taught such.

When I ask for early church reference I am asking for what the Church once and always believed and that is not being flippant nor simplistic. Your reference to the O.T. showbread is thought provoking but they still did not worship the bread. The problem here with me is in believing in the real presence in the Mass for consumption, I do, and worshipping what is left over.

Tertullian and St Cyril speak of keeping the host in reserve, which would naturally be the forerunner to such a concept as Adoration. It is said of St Basil of the early 4th century that after giving the Host to himself and the monks, he placed the remainder in a golden dove over the altar. The eastern churches developed the practice sooner than the western churches, most likely due to the fact that they kept the host in reserve in the monasteries, out of which the practice came.

St Augustine states: “He walked here in the same flesh, and gave us the same flesh to be eaten unto salvation. But no one eats that flesh unless he first adores it; and thus it is discovered how such a footstool of the Lord’s feet is adored; and not only do we not sin by adoring, we do sin by not adoring.” –Commentary on Psalms 98:9

So what happens if we don’t consume? Should we not still adore?

They are not referring to what we call Eucharistic Adoration. Keeping in reserve and adoring here are speaking about worshipful consumption. If we don’t consume, we are to worship as if we are but this is in the context of the Mass.

Him. Not “it.”

Cheap correction. Let me ask you when Jesus returns will we see a host upon a white horse? The mystery of the Eucharist is little understood and deserves meditation for sure. We used to sit in church to meditate on the artifacts there. The crucifix, the statues, the tabernacle and the stations help to focus meditation. These artifacts though were not worshipped. I know it sounds illogical to say that the Eucharist is God and to question worshipping the Eucharist outside of Mass but that is where I am at. I can meditate on the Eucharist as God outside of Mass but it seems like there is a line I am crossing to actually worship the Eucharist while displayed in a monstronce outside of Mass.

It may be time for some self-reflection on your end.

(Edited) what do you think brought me to this thread. (Edited)

 

[Church_Militant]

The subject of the thread is Eucharistic Adoration. Of course the theology of the Lords Supper comes into play but it doesn’t necessarily have to and I would ask:

1. where in Scripture or early church Tradition do we find Eucharistic Adoration?;

Did you bother to read my study The Eucharist IS Scriptural? It offered both scripture and citation of ECF Ignatius of Antioch. Moreover, do you not recall the early church martyrs who died rather than surrender the Eucharist to pagans seeking to desecrate it? If they did not believe in the Real Presence then what were they dying for? Martyrs for the Eucharist - Catholic Answers Forums, Eucharistic Martyrs, & A Modern Martyr of the Eucharist.

1. when did the modern form of Eucharistic Adoration start since I don’t remember this from my youth in the 50’s and 60’s when I served as an altar boy?

You must not have been paying attention then, because I remember the 40 hours devotions in my parish and I am from pretty much that same era. As for history see Perpetual Adoration from the Catholic Encyclopedia which states that there is discussion of it as far back as St. Augustine, but goes on to say that it apparently wasn’t widespread until about circa the 13th century.

1. meditation on the Eucharist is very different from Eucharistic Adoration as an event(for lack of better word). Can’t one believe in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist and think that the event of Euchatistic Adoration is “over the top” even though it seems a logical extension?

If, as the New Testament, ECF and the Church teaches we believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, then how could adoration of Christ in the Eucharist ever be “over the top”. After all, we do that very same thing during Mass when the priest prays,

Doxology and Great Amen:
Priest: Through him, with him, and in him, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, all glory and honor is yours, almighty Father, for ever and ever.
All: Amen!

That is definitely Eucharistic Adoration.

1. in John 3:14 Jesus says that “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;” Moses was commanded by God to forge a golden serpent on a pole and lift it up in front of Israel and all who gazed upon it would be healed of the poisonous serpent bite. Eventually in the time of the Judges, certain of Israel were displaying the pole and worshipping it. They found out that they had taken this too far. Have we taken it too far?

Not according to all three branches of Divine Revelation we have not. Moreover, the brass serpent was merely an image and nowhere ever even inferred to be a god, whereas, as I have already shown you, we have all 3 faithful witnesses affirming that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum