Painting the Eucharist with Precious Blood

[giuseppe96]

I’m no expert, but that sounds like a liturgical abuse.

 

[Cathoholic]

medwigel . . .

I would refer you to 1 Corinthians 11:23-26
Paul is teaching the church how to take communion in the right way. Paul is passing along what he received from Christ, and in his instructions he delineates that communion is the receiving of 2 things- the bread AND the wine.
.
So how does this scripture fit in with the concept of the Eucharist under EITHER species? I can’t find it in the Bible, so if it’s not in the Bible then how is this practice justified?

.

OK.

So what you see as obedient to the Scriptures is partaking of bread.

And also partaking of wine.

Both.

Is this correct? (I just want to make sure I know where you are coming from medwigel.)

 

[medwigel]

Exactly!
Every instance of communion we see in the Bible demonstrates both bread and wine.
So how do you go against scripture?

 

[medwigel]

Matthew 28:19 "Go, then, to all peoples everywhere and make them MY DISCIPLES: "
Jesus commanded the 11 to “make them my disciples” which means He intends to have more than just 11 disciples.
No one is cherry picking,I’m just reading the words of Matthew; if you object then you must take it up with the author of the book, not me.
The word disciples simply means follower, and this verse is referring to followers of Christ. John the Baptist had disciples, Moses had “disciples” (John 9:29). Even Jesus had more than just 12 disciples- read Luke 10.
So no cherry picking here, I’m just putting my Bible together.
The Bible is a book of instructions and promises to us the believers of this day; it is the believers who make the church.

 

[Cathoholic]

Cathoholic . . . .

OK.
.
So what you see as obedient to the Scriptures is partaking of bread.
.
And also partaking of wine.
.
Both.
.
Is this correct?

.

medwigel . . . .

Exactly.

.

Medwigel . . . .

Every instance of communion we see in the Bible demonstrates both bread and wine.
So how do you go against scripture?

That’s a fair enough question medwigel and a good one.

I’ll try to get to a computer to give you a better answer (than I can give on my android).

It might be tomorrow though. Keep up the asking of these good questions though.

(The short answer of course is we don’t merely receive “bread” etc. and we are not disobedient to Scripture. But more later.)

 

[Cathoholic]

To readers of this thread.

I just realized this discussion has (in part) taken place on a different thread too.

My apologies and here are the links necessary to complete the points I wanted to make here.

Some think Matthew 4:4 is teaching sola Scriptura Sacred Scripture

medwigel . . . . What you have given me continues to talk about the “body and blood”- 2 separate things. I still don’t see where it says taking 1 can fulfill both. You don’t need to for now. All that I am saying is that IF a Catholic is (or at least THINKS he is) receiving the body AND the blood via x, y, or z. . . . . . . . can you see that the Catholic (at least) THINKS he is receiving the body AND blood via x, y, or z? (I will get to the Biblical ideas later. For now, I just want you …

.

Some think Matthew 4:4 is teaching sola Scriptura Sacred Scripture

1st CORINTHIANS 11:23-30 23 For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 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.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you p…

.

Some think Matthew 4:4 is teaching sola Scriptura Sacred Scripture

If you approach the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin or “unworthily”, or if you approach the Eucharist in a state of unbelief or “without discerning the body” what happens? Well if this was mere symbolism probably nothing. But this is NOT mere symbolism. It is serious business. 1st CORINTHIANS 11:29 29 For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. If this guy approaches the Eucharist in a state of “unworthiness” or unbelief he . .…

.

1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.

Now notice what St. Paul DOESN’T say . . . .

NOT 1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread AND drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.

What did St. Paul teach in 1st Corinthians 11:27?

That whoever, therefore, eats the bread in an unworthy manner will be guilty of
profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.

OR whoever, therefore, drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of
profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.

The ONLY way you could be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord by unworthily partaking of the bread (that is ONE species), is if when partaking of the bread, you received the body AND blood of the Lord!

The same is just as true for the blood.

When we receive the “bread” (of Life), we receive the body AND BLOOD (soul and Divinity as well) of Jesus.

Likewise if we “just” receive of “the cup”.

Why?

Because St. Paul says so.

Some think Matthew 4:4 is teaching sola Scriptura Sacred Scripture

1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord. Now notice what St. Paul DOESN’T say . . . . NOT 1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread AND drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. What did St. Paul teach in 1st Corinthians 11:27? That whoever, therefore, eats the bread in a…

.

.

St. Paul

whoever, therefore, eats the bread in an unworthy manner will be guilty of
profaning the body AND blood of the Lord

.

The Catholic Church

whoever, therefore, eats the bread in an unworthy manner will be guilty of
profaning the body AND blood of the Lord

.

Cathoholic

whoever, therefore, eats the bread in an unworthy manner will be guilty of
profaning the body AND blood of the Lord

.

Medwigel

that’s my issue, teaching that the bread alone suffices as Christ Body and Blood is wrong teaching

Some think Matthew 4:4 is teaching sola Scriptura Sacred Scripture

St. Paul whoever, therefore, eats the bread in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord . The Catholic Church whoever, therefore, eats the bread in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord . Cathoholic whoever, therefore, eats the bread in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord . Medwigel that’s my issue, teaching that the bread alone suffices as Christ Body and Bl…

 

[FrDavid96]

To readers of this thread.

…

As Catholics, we know the truth of the matter.

In the Eucharist, in either or both species, the entire Christ is contained: Body and Blood.

It might need to be explained, but it need not be proven.

 

[medwigel]

It might need to be explained, but it need not be proven.

Um, you most definitely need to prove it, because the Bible never sanctioned such a thing. Any time you see communion taught or done it is with the Body and Blood TOGETHER.
So you need to prove where one can encompass both. Where did this teaching/belief come from?

 

[medwigel]

whoever, therefore, eats the bread in an unworthy manner will be guilty of

profaning the body AND blood of the Lord

You have quoted the scripture incorrectly. If says, “Whoever, therefore eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord” 1 Corinthians 11:27
See, it mentions both bread and cup, not just one.
I would request if you quote scripture you should cut out words to fit your argument.

 

[Cathoholic]

1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.

Is asserting . . .

Whoever, therefore, eats the bread in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.

As well as . . . .

Whoever drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.

Either/“OR”.

.

Not this (which is in essence what you are asserting medwigel) . . . .

Whoever, therefore, eats the bread AND drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.

.

Here it is again . . . .

.

1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.

 

[medwigel]

This scripture is not granting you permission to take just one, it’s a caution of what will happen if you disrespect either of them when you do take both.
For example you may like drinking the cup because to you like drinking wine- wrong motive
Or, like back in the day, you take the bread because you are hungry- wrong motive

Your motive must be correct towards both the Body and the Blood.
But this scripture is in now way saying you can take one or the other.

 

[FrDavid96]

FrDavid96:

It might need to be explained, but it need not be proven.

Um, you most definitely need to prove it, because the Bible never sanctioned such a thing. Any time you see communion taught or done it is with the Body and Blood TOGETHER.
So you need to prove where one can encompass both. Where did this teaching/belief come from?

It’s already been proven. The Church has proven it.

It is explained (as has already been shown here, at least once) by the principle of concomitance.

 

[medwigel]

It is explained (as has already been shown here, at least once) by the principle of concomitance.

What Bible verse asserts this teaching?

 

[Cathoholic]

medwigel (regarding the Eucharist under one or both species) . . .

This scripture is not granting you permission to take just one, it’s a caution of what will happen if you disrespect either of them when you do take both.

This assumes you “take” the Eucharist.

Actually medwigel, the laity doesn’t “TAKE” either species of the Eucharist.

We “RECEIVE” the Blessed Sacrament at the hands of the Priest and/or his proxy.

• We RECEIVE . . . NOT Take

.

1st CORINTHIANS 11:27a 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord . . .

St. Paul just matter of factly assumes one may be in a situation where they may receive the host, “OR” receive of the cup.

And if they “receive” “the body and blood of the Lord” in an unworthy manner there is great accountability (in “either/or” situation–because each situation results in the same profanation . . . That of profaning the Body AND Blood of the Lord).

.

1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.

.

NOT 1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of taking Holy Communion the wrong way because he NEEDS to TAKE both forms.

.

1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.

 

[phil19034]

I say follow what you canonized.

In regards to communion, where do we not?

Intinction is typically something that happens in Eastern Christianity. While, it’s allowed in the Western Church, it’s typically rare. The only time is see it is when the priest has a cold or something.

 

[phil19034]

A body without blood is dead, not alive.

Christ is alive. Therefore, He is body, blood, soul & divinity all in one.

This is also why, the priest drops a small piece of the body into the chalice, with the Precious Blood.

This is also why over the centuries, we have had eucharistic miracles with bleeding hosts to confirm our belief.

God Bless

 

[medwigel]

This is also why, the priest drops a small piece of the body into the chalice, with the Precious Blood.

Show me in the Bible were communion was done with just bread alone to represent everything. Anytime communion was done or taught in the Bible it was done with bread AND wine. There is no where in the Bible were is says just take one to represent all.
There should not be so many “acceptable” ways of doing communion (Eastern vs Western) because the source, which is the Bible, laid out the foundation as to why and how it should be done. To do it any other way, or to provide alternative ways of doing it, is basically go way off script. It may seem right to you, and you can rationalize it so that it sounds good, but that’s not what God told us to do.
Proverbs 14:12 & Proverbs 16:25 both say “There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death”.

 

[medwigel]

St. Paul just matter of factly assumes one may be in a situation where they may receive the host, “OR” receive of the cup.

No, this is not assuming you can do one or the other.

A good example of what Paul is conveying is:
Lets say you are taking a test and the instructions are, in order to get graded you must put your name AND date of birth on your paper. If forget to put your name OR your date of birth on your paper, then the whole test is invalid and you fail the whole test. You need to do both in order for the test to qualify.
As such, you need to take the bread and the wine in order for it to constitute communion.

 

[Cathoholic]

medwigel . . .

As such, you need to take the bread and the wine in order for it to constitute communion.

No medwigel.

As such, you need to RECEIVE the body AND the blood of the Lord in order for it to constitute communion.

Communing with ALL of Jesus . . . (you know what I’m going to say) . . . is how you commune with ALL of Jesus.

If you partake of the bread of life, you receive ALL of Jesus (“the body AND blood of the Lord.”).
“OR” as the Scriptures explicitly state (but you are not going to admit) . . . .
. . . If you partake of the Chalice of Salvation, you receive ALL of Jesus (“the body AND blood of the Lord.”).

.

NOT 1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of taking Holy Communion the wrong way because he NEEDS to TAKE both forms.

.

1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.

 

[Cathoholic]

I want to ask readers of this thread to go back and read medwigel’s arguments on this thread and here and elsewhere here and here and note how few of medwigel’s post have ANY Scripture cited compared to the Catholic posts for backing up his traditions.

Then go back and re-read the Catholic posts. Notice the Scriptures cited.

The Emmaus Discourse that was cited, follows the structure of the Mass.

There was an introduction. (The disciples do not recognize our Lord) Think “The Introductory Rite”.

A breaking out of the Scriptures. (The disciples continue to not recognize our Lord) Think of the Readings at Mass.

An expounding on those passages (then Jesus explained to them where He was in the Old Testament). (The disciples still do not recognize our Lord) Think of the Homily.

When do Jesus’ own disciples recognize our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ?

In “the breaking of the Bread” is when Jesus’ disciples recognized Jesus. A phrase for “partaking of Holy Communion”. Think of the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

THEN they recognize Jesus.

Medwigel can’t see this.

Medwigel will have you thinking these guys just “needed a liitle chow” and then Shazam! . . .

. . . "Now that I got some grub, well . . . well . . . would you look at THAT. It’s Jesus!"

Yeah by golly! If we would have only had a snack a little earlier.

Yeah, and now He’s gone!

.

This kind of anti-supernatural tradition is inappropriate. Don’t fall for it.

Ask medwigel if he WORSHIPS the Eucharist in his ecclesial community? (unless he is Catholic or Eastern Orthodox, the chances approach zero that the Eucharist is even in his ecclesial communion).

I worship the Eucharist in the Church that Jesus founded and I hope you do too.

.

1st CORINTHIANS 11:27 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread OR drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body AND blood of the Lord.