Protestants and Holy Communion

[jcrichton]

I’m out of this conversation, I gave my opinion as a RC, which differs from most on here. The thing is we are all different. There is not one mold. I am not trying to change anyones mind, but it has gotten carried away. I responded to the topic and I understand people disagree with me and thats fine. But I won’t continue to discuss s our differences, as I feel attacked for having a different opinion . Thank you.

I will trust a Priest, they know what they are doing, if we can’t trust our Priest then who are we suppose to trust.

…if that Priest is engaged in heresy then you are simply assisting his disobedience and as Christ said are following a blind leader!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

And I would expect my bishop to do nothing; at least, that’s been the general trend with respect to far worse cases than what my parish priest said.

Hi, Huiou!
…I’ve been lucky not to have such battles to fight… but I am very found of that old adage: “a pen is mightier…”

It is surprising what can happen when, with love and respect, an error (or seeming error) is questioned; unless your Bishop is so head-strong that he believes himself to be above sin/correction I think that you have to be as precise and persistent as possible… and don’t forget to go beyond the Bishop to his superior or his superior’s superior (each time sending cc of the correspondence).

I have suffered many times waiting for the “smoke” to clear; but unless I lit a literal fire – I doubt I could move the local priests. In fact, the other one I know was rather hostile and underhanded with reprisals even when I DIDN’T try to light his fire – but was forced into a very shallow no-win situation by his own actions (directly against his bishop’s, I might add – and he even accused the bishop and the archdiocese of being evil to my face, while attempting intimidation…many years ago, and I’m glad it’s long over…)

Victory is never as easy as pie–specially when dealing with the fellowship with Christ and in Christ! (I can recall a few of the saints going through such oppressive turmoil–look at San Martín de Porres… he was not even allowed to become a Priest!)

I know that it is wrong to receive communion after mortal sin, and even after a perfect contrition; but I don’t know the gravity of it when perfect contrition is involved. All the council of Trent says on the issue is that perfect contrition requires a firm resolution to go to confession as “soon as possible”. But that’s an open ended problem – A protestant may not be invited to confession by Fr. Jim (dunno, I’m not a protestant to be able to test the issue.) and therefore “as soon as possible” may be a LONG time off around him! On the other hand, perhaps it isn’t.

…I think this goes back to St. Paul’s caution "as long as your conscience

I can’t exactly go bothering the Bishop about a Fraudian slip of the tongue on Fr.'s part !. Those who disobey, again, are only guilty of Mortal sin if the three conditions persist.

Is this not, however, how it shall be with Fr. If he has abused the Eucharist?

If I don’t REALLY know what the master is about, why ought I beat Fr. ?
Look twice, strike once.

I’m quite pedestrian… I am ignorant of most Church’s Teachings… but I know that if I were to teach in Christ’s Name I must be meticulous in what I pass down to others… a Priest/Religious must be even more conscientious than I… not because the Priest/Religious knows more about Church Doctrine but because Scriptures has ordained so (St. James 3:1).

Can error be allowed to be taught? …look at what happened to the world when the Church relaxed during Luther’s awakening and rebellion!

…how many millions are set on a path against Christ due to ignorance or arrogance?

If I encounter what I believe to be error and remain silent, am I not enabling the Body of Christ to suffer the consequences of that error? (Granted, if it is only perceived error I would no doubt be set straight.)

Maran atha!

Angel

St. James 3;1

 

[jcrichton]

I have made something of a contentious statement that I think bears looking at by Catholics a little closer.

It is true that when a non-believer or Catholic (even if baptized) receives the Eucharist – that Jesus is present; But I have said that all they can take away from him is bread and wine;

I’d like to point out why I said this – and to invite some examination of doctrine.
The Eucharist has a purpose. The name itself is either “Good gift” or “Well thanked”.
We know that the real presence only lasts for about 15 minutes (or so) once consumed. (and we are speaking about reception of Eucharist – and not theft of it from the church, and prolonged events…)

I think that it goes beyond that… if I were to take the Holy Eucharist to desacrete it… Jesus will not be part of that Host. Conversely, I’ve heard stories of Eucharistic adoration where a child sneaked into an abandoned church and has consummed one Host per day as she was able to rescue it from the floor where it had been trampled upon by an anti-Christ agent–Christ was indeed present every time she consummed the Host…

Jesus himself is no longer able to suffer, that one should say he can be murdered (again). Yet St. Pauls expression is “they crucify to themselves”.

…are you speaking of 1 Corinthians 11: 27 or 29?

The purpose of the Eucharist is a reciprocal relationship (Grace/charis); and it allows all (men and women) without sexual union to become one Flesh with Christ.
There will be no marriage, nor giving in marriage, nor even POLYGAMY with one husband (Jesus Christ); For the institution of the Eucharist is the remedy to the issue of sexual reproduction being tainted with Original sin, and limited in how it may lawfully be applied. This is how heaven can be likened to marriage, in purity, of a multitude to ONE man.

I am thinking in a way which is somewhat marriage oriented and in the genera of popular opinion about marriage; eg: Where often I hear the words “I’m looking for the ONE for me.” As if there is only one mate, one spouse, possible for someone to marry and be happy with. (I don’t subscribe to it, but there is a yearning which I’d like to note that is somehow fulfilled in a true marriage.)

Some marriages are Null, some are fornication, some are illicit, and these often disintegrate back into the single state. Just so the Eucharist once received improperly also dis-integrates back into normal food. The Eucharist IS true food in both the spiritual and the physical sense; and something DOES happen when it is received – but something more happens when it is received well.

…as I read through this a thought came to mind… what if that marriage is indeed between only two parties: Christ, the Bridegroom and the Church, the Bride–there’s no individualism in the Body of Christ!

I’m not sure how to express the thought I have which is so persistent. But I do want to affirm something; Each Eucharist is given with a person in mind. When the wrong person comes along and takes what is not theirs, they may well delay reception of it by a person to whom it is meant.

…I think I follow you… but the way I see it is this: every person comes to God with his/her Faith naked and fully exposed… the Eucharist does not become part of us till Christ makes us part of Him (St. John 6:56).

I’d like to hear what people think of St. Pauls words “Guilty of the body and blood” of the Lord in light of what I am proffering; I am of course, as usual, not offended if you contradict me. But what of SyCarl who claims to receive it?

Shalom.

It is an individual experience… the creature coming to sup with the Creator and the Creator Himself being the meal… much like the manna, Christ, in the Eucharist form, supplies what each indiviual needs for his/her spiritual growth… yet, as with the lazy servant, those who do not discern Christ in the Eucharist or those who are consciously attempting to receive Him unworthily will end up with less than nothing as even that which they believe that they possess will be taken away!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Huiou_Theou]

I think that it goes beyond that… if I were to take the Holy Eucharist to desacrete it… Jesus will not be part of that Host.

God forbid! (Although he isn’t a part of any host, rather he holds it in existence by his presence, whereas normally simple bread is held in existence not by a person and presence – but by the power of God from the foundation of the world.)

A friend of mine is saying as we discuss this, “The Eucharist is not nullified by someone taking it and desecrating it; What it boils down to is that the consequences of desecrating it will be owned by the desecration. It is said up front somewhere in scripture, many of you are sick and dead because you receive the Eucharist wrongly.”
(I think he means 1Cor 11:30)

…are you speaking of 1 Corinthians 11: 27 or 29?

RSV: Hebrews 6:4-6
For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have **tasted the Goodness of the Word of God **and the powers of the world to come, if they commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt.

Again, referring back to an earlier post of mine – Man does not live by bread alone, but by every WORD that falls from the mouth of God. It is the Spirit which gives the bread and the body and the flesh and the blood – Life.

…I think I follow you… but the way I see it is this: every person comes to God with his/her Faith naked and fully exposed… the Eucharist does not become part of us till Christ makes us part of Him (St. John 6:56).

As far as I go, I think that’s achieved by sacramental baptism in the case of the OP protestants.

It is an individual experience… the creature coming to sup with the Creator and the Creator Himself being the meal… much like the manna, Christ, in the Eucharist form, supplies what each indiviual needs for his/her spiritual growth… yet, as with the lazy servant, those who do not discern Christ in the Eucharist or those who are consciously attempting to receive Him unworthily will end up with less than nothing as even that which they believe that they possess will be taken away!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Huiou_Theou]

***…while your argument seems sound, I caution you that demons also Believe that there’s a God… they tremble… but they reject His Authority!

Conversely, we cannot come to God as we please (remember what happened to Aaron’s son when he brought the strange fire?.. the fellow attempting to keep the Ark of the Covenant from falling to the ground when David had retrieved it, how he touched it directly and died?) If by literal you mean that the worst of human beings could just grab a Sacred Host and he/she will automatically obtain Salvation… you must be running with the “always saved” crowds… Jesus is speaking to and of the Believers…

Angel***

Thought provoking, Angel; look at a closer scripture: In John 6:63-65, it is specifically Judas who does not believe; and that is in opposition to the very sentence of Jesus’ regarding “It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail”

(SIDE NOTE: Bread=flesh, Jesus did not say Wine (spirit) as “worthless” eh??!, even if one symbolized the Bread, John 6 doesn’t allow it of the Wine… )

Continuing:
“'He said ‘The words that I have spoken to you are spirit AND life. But there are some of YOU THAT DO NOT **BELIEVE’, **[he said this] because he knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that would betray him and he said, ‘This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.’”

Knowledge of this kind is Jewish idiom for an experiential encounter; not “cerebreal” fore-knowledge.

 

[Cinette]

I can’t imagine what Lutheran Church you might have attended where there was no consecration. That would be unbiblical, and in violation of the confessions.

Jon

*A Lutheran Pastor told me that they believe that the bread and wine is the body and blood of Jesus when it is consumed. After communion they throw away whatever is left over to the birds.

 

[Cinette]

In John 6 when Jesus speaks of the manna the Jews ate in the dessert the Jews knew exactly what he was talking about. They knew that the manna was real food that the Jews ate and were sustained by it in the dessert So when Jesus mentions it they understand Jesus as speaking literallyof real material food. But when Jesus switches over to His Body as the new manna the Jews are aghast. Why? They are still understanding Jesus literally and materially. Jesus knows this. He sees many turn away from Him to include some of His own disciples. IF they misunderstood Him then as a teacher Jesus owes them an explanation and He gives one. He says His words are Spirit.

Protestants want to think that He means He was speaking only figuratively not literally. But Spirit is not the opposite of literal. Spirit is the opposite of material. Jesus was speaking spiritually not materially. Jesus says nothing else. IF Jesus was not speaking literally then He is committing a great sin because He is the cause of people walking away from their salvation. IF He is speaking figuratively then He owes the people an explanation. But He gives none. Why? Because Jesus was speaking literally of spiritual food. That is the only explanation one can draw from the discourse without having Jesus commit a great sin.

That is why there are so many protestant denominations today. Whenever three protrestants can’t agree on doctrine a new denomination begins. Apply that to the Old Testament. It wasn’t a case of, “Well what do you think?” No, it was a case of, “Thus sayeth the Lord.” That closed the case. There was only one chosen people then not myriads. Jesus established one church and prayed that His followers be one. Protestantism, with its lax doctrinal positions, while having great appeal, is not a church, let alone the one church.

*Jesus said " (Jn 6:55)…for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me and I in them." He did not say his flesh and blood were “spiritual food”. He said they were “true” food - not spiritual food.

I believe in His words because I love and trust Jesus. I do not understand - it is a mystery. If Jesus could feed a multitude of people with a few loaves and fish he can do anything. He is also our Creator. We must accept his words and in Jn 6:52-69 he was most explicit what he meant. We do not have to understand in order to believe. Our Christian faith is full of mysteries.

God bless
Cinette*

 

[Cinette]

***…my understanding of Catholic theology is that public revelation ended with the death of the last of the original Apostles (12 + 1); but the Church maintains that there can be private revelation (if it exists within Biblical Truth).

Maran atha!

Angel***

*While public revelation ended with the death of the Apostles more truths were revealed to us through the Church scholars who developed doctrines. For example while the truth of the Trinity was contained in Sacred Tradition/Scripture it was not perceived as such until Church scholars defined and explained it to us.

*

 

[onthisrock]

Grew up Lutheran and we would have “communion” about every 3 months. No consecration just believe that it is the Body and Blood. Catholic now by the grace of God- the Eucharist is so so different than in the Lutheran church.

I’m a convert from the Lutheran “church” too…14 years this Saturday is my Catholic anniversary…I LOVE holy Saturday as it just takes me back to that day, in the big beautiful old church in Philly. I still cry when everyone is received into the church…But you are right. We would have communion once a months, and then special occasions. Jesus said “do this as often as you eat…as often as you drink” that is saying do it DAILY as we eat and drink daily. People are so naive to say Lutheran’s are “practically the same” right…I never even knew what eucharist meant or that the entire Chapter of John 6 repeats 6 times that this is my body! Not a symbol, and the gospel of John did NOT speak in parables, hence it being a gnostic gospel. sayng the same clarification after question after question, and repeating the answer is clear to me. we know he was literal in this statement as when his dicsiples were leaving who could not handle it…he would have said something to bring them back…He knew what was to happen. He didn’t say…“I’m speaking in parables for you simple people” he just said…OK…if you want to leave too, go ahead, but I’m not changing what I just told you six times straight! It is a mystery…a further faith exercise to test true belief. When protestants use the Catholic Canon from the 4th century to try and “stump” us somehow, is just hilarious and sad at the same time. If the protestants came along and took all of the books that weren’t part of the Catholic canon, then there could be an argument…“who is right” but they chose to keep our bible (minus the books catholics "added 300 years before Christ in the septugent)…this means they have enough faith to follow our compilation as 100% fact, when even the Bible says that everything is NOT in there ie) last chapter in the gospel of John…and 2Thesseloinians:2,15. I don’t need to explain to you how different it is. I love to talk with converts…I feel really connected, and overjoyed at the amount of people becoming Catholic each year. the pope just opened the doors to the Anglicans…there were many who were sick of the way thier church was accepting the secular world with gay bishops and woman clergy, abortion, etc. I actually saw an Anglican Catholic Church and the pope is giving special dispensation for men who were Anglican priests to beome Catholic priests, of course with some further studies…so we are going to have a little confusion when we have many married priests. The Pope is truly ecumenical. they keep their traditions, but have true consecration and are in line with rome…it’s a beautiful thing for sure. People think we Catholics need to get with the times, but people are asking for it to be the other way around, and this new “Anglican Catholicism” is a prime example. I think in the beginning of the year it was a welcoming of 2000 Anglicans?! that’s really amazing. I love the RCIA process, and am considering taking diococene classes, so pray for a vocation in that department. I know it’s hard for protestants to not go to communion, like we’re a secret society…it’s just they are not in communion with the church and therefore should not act as if…for their own good. Well, I’ve gone on, just super excited during holy week, and saw you were originally Lutheran as i was. Have a great Holy Week…and God Bless!

 

[onthisrock]

*While public revelation ended with the death of the Apostles more truths were revealed to us through the Church scholars who developed doctrines. For example while the truth of the Trinity was contained in Sacred Tradition/Scripture it was not perceived as such until Church scholars defined and explained it to us.

*

Also, topics that were just universally accepted with no question, began having “issues” Like the Immaculate conception…no one ever questioned it, but when a stink was made with people trying to see what THEY wanted to see etc…the popes and other early Church Fathers, had to go and actually do something that has done much fewer times than people think…and that is for the pope to call something “dogma” Ex Cathedra. Protestants will have you thinking the Church is constantly in the process of making new “man made” laws up (as if the pope has a bunch of free time to be doing this)

 

[Cinette]

*It makes me very sad to read the critics of the Catholic Church in the Media. The Catholic Church threatens no-one. On the contrary it is the largest Charity organization in the world and opens its arms to one and all. You do not have to be Catholic to benefit.

The Catholic Church does not belong to Catholics alone - it belongs to everyone on the planet who wishes to embrace it. No-one is excluded. Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, Schools, and so on and on - the list is immense. So many priests and religious have given their lives to serve - so many have lost their lives and suffered for humanity. The Church is there to service everybody.

If the Church was to cease tomorrow the world would be a sad place and people would suffer tremendously.

*

 

[Isaiah45_9]

The Body of Christ is the Church which consists of Christians. What makes you think you have the truth? What is the truth? Who is the Truth? The is nly one truth and that is Jesus is our Lord and Saviour and any Christ filled Christian believes that.

Here you go:

[bibledrb]1 Timothy 3:15[/bibledrb]

FOUR MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH

If we wish to locate the Church founded by Jesus, we need to locate the one that has the four chief marks or qualities of his Church. The Church we seek must be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic.
The Church Is One (Rom. 12:5, 1 Cor. 10:17, 12:13, CCC 813–822)
Jesus established only one Church, not a collection of differing churches (Lutheran, Baptist, Anglican, and so on). The Bible says the Church is the bride of Christ (Eph. 5:23–32). Jesus can have but one spouse, and his spouse is the Catholic Church.

His Church also teaches just one set of doctrines, which must be the same as those taught by the apostles (Jude 3). This is the unity of belief to which Scripture calls us (Phil. 1:27, 2:2).

Although some Catholics dissent from officially-taught doctrines, the Church’s official teachers—the pope and the bishops united with him—have never changed any doctrine. Over the centuries, as doctrines are examined more fully, the Church comes to understand them more deeply (John 16:12–13), but it never understands them to mean the opposite of what they once meant.

The Church Is Holy (Eph. 5:25–27, Rev. 19:7–8, CCC 823–829)
By his grace Jesus makes the Church holy, just as he is holy. This doesn’t mean that each member is always holy. Jesus said there would be both good and bad members in the Church (John 6:70), and not all the members would go to heaven (Matt. 7:21–23).

But the Church itself is holy because it is the source of holiness and is the guardian of the special means of grace Jesus established, the sacraments (cf. Eph. 5:26).

The Church Is Catholic (Matt. 28:19–20, Rev. 5:9–10, CCC 830–856)
Jesus’ Church is called catholic (“universal” in Greek) because it is his gift to all people. He told his apostles to go throughout the world and make disciples of “all nations” (Matt. 28:19–20).

For 2,000 years the Catholic Church has carried out this mission, preaching the good news that Christ died for all men and that he wants all of us to be members of his universal family (Gal. 3:28).

Nowadays the Catholic Church is found in every country of the world and is still sending out missionaries to “make disciples of all nations” (Matt. 28:19).

The Church Jesus established was known by its most common title, “the Catholic Church,” at least as early as the year 107, when Ignatius of Antioch used that title to describe the one Church Jesus founded. The title apparently was old in Ignatius’s time, which means it probably went all the way back to the time of the apostles.

The Church Is Apostolic (Eph. 2:19–20, CCC 857–865)
The Church Jesus founded is apostolic because he appointed the apostles to be the first leaders of the Church, and their successors were to be its future leaders. The apostles were the first bishops, and, since the first century, there has been an unbroken line of Catholic bishops faithfully handing on what the apostles taught the first Christians in Scripture and oral Tradition (2 Tim. 2:2).

These beliefs include the bodily Resurrection of Jesus, the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, the sacrificial nature of the Mass, the forgiveness of sins through a priest, baptismal regeneration, the existence of purgatory, Mary’s special role, and much more —even the doctrine of apostolic succession itself.

Early Christian writings prove the first Christians were thoroughly Catholic in belief and practice and looked to the successors of the apostles as their leaders. What these first Christians believed is still believed by the Catholic Church. No other Church can make that claim.

Above quote from here:
catholic.com/documents/pillar-of-fire-pillar-of-truth

 

[inkaneer]

*Jesus said " (Jn 6:55)…for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me and I in them." He did not say his flesh and blood were “spiritual food”. He said they were “true” food - not spiritual food.

I believe in His words because I love and trust Jesus. I do not understand - it is a mystery. If Jesus could feed a multitude of people with a few loaves and fish he can do anything. He is also our Creator. We must accept his words and in Jn 6:52-69 he was most explicit what he meant. We do not have to understand in order to believe. Our Christian faith is full of mysteries.

God bless
Cinette*

Spiritual food is true food …for the spirit [soul]. Notice that the Eucharist given during the sacrament of the sick and dying [Last Rites] is called Holy Viaticum. The Catholic Encyclopedia says of it:

“Formerly it meant anything that gave spiritual strength and comfort to the dying and enabled them to make the journey into eternity with greater confidence and security.
. . . But finally it acquired its present fixed, exclusive, and technical sense of Holy Communion given to those in danger of death. The Catechism of the Council of Trent (De Euch. sacr., n. 3) says: ‘Sacred writers call it the Viaticum as well because it is the spiritual food by which we are supported in our mortal pilgrimage, as also because it prepares for us a passage to eternal glory and happiness’”.

 

[inkaneer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
As a member of the LCMS [Lutheran Church Missouri Synod] you are not Catholic. So your response to the ‘Religion’ field is erroneous. You cannot be a follower of Martin Luther which, as a member of the LCMS, you are and be Catholic. Luther was a heretic who preached error. I see your description of “evangelical catholic LCMS” as an attempt to wrap yourself in the mantle of the true church of Jesus Christ while maintaining your heretical beliefs. The LCMS, if they follow Martin Luther as they claim they do, denies church authority because they know they have no authority and that includes the authority to bind and loose as well as the authority to forgive or retain sin.

Sure I am, and sure they do.

Jon

Obviously your own personal opinion which is akin to private interpretation that protestantism is famous for. You are no Catholic at all. In fact, neither you nor any protestant can be considered catholic [small ‘c’] as none of you are truly universal in belief. Once again private interpretation raises negates catholicity. Claim it all you want but it is a fraudulent claim.

 

[JonNC]

*A Lutheran Pastor told me that they believe that the bread and wine is the body and blood of Jesus when it is consumed. After communion they throw away whatever is left over to the birds.

Then he told you falsely! Lutherans do not believe in receptionism. The concept is not in any way expressed in the confessions. Christ clearly said, “This is my body”, not “this will become my body”. you are welcome to invite the pastor here, and I will dispute it with him.
Have you had any experiences with Catholic priests who have gotten Catholic teachings wrong?

Jon

 

[JonNC]

*It makes me very sad to read the critics of the Catholic Church in the Media. The Catholic Church threatens no-one. On the contrary it is the largest Charity organization in the world and opens its arms to one and all. You do not have to be Catholic to benefit.

The Catholic Church does not belong to Catholics alone - it belongs to everyone on the planet who wishes to embrace it. No-one is excluded. Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, Schools, and so on and on - the list is immense. So many priests and religious have given their lives to serve - so many have lost their lives and suffered for humanity. The Church is there to service everybody.

If the Church was to cease tomorrow the world would be a sad place and people would suffer tremendously.

*

Amen!! God bless the Catholic Church, and the Bishop of Rome, Pope Benedict XVI.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
As a member of the LCMS [Lutheran Church Missouri Synod] you are not Catholic. So your response to the ‘Religion’ field is erroneous. You cannot be a follower of Martin Luther which, as a member of the LCMS, you are and be Catholic. Luther was a heretic who preached error. I see your description of “evangelical catholic LCMS” as an attempt to wrap yourself in the mantle of the true church of Jesus Christ while maintaining your heretical beliefs. The LCMS, if they follow Martin Luther as they claim they do, denies church authority because they know they have no authority and that includes the authority to bind and loose as well as the authority to forgive or retain sin.

Obviously your own personal opinion which is akin to private interpretation that protestantism is famous for. You are no Catholic at all. In fact, neither you nor any protestant can be considered catholic [small ‘c’] as none of you are truly universal in belief. Once again private interpretation raises negates catholicity. Claim it all you want but it is a fraudulent claim.

Obviously it is not a matter of my personal opinion, at least no moreso than yours. If the Catholic Catechism says:

In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 **The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ’s Body **

This speaks of one body of Christ - the Church Catholic! And that our division, for which both sides are to blame (yes! your side and mine), ruptures the unity of the one holy catholic and Apostolic Church.

And,

“However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.”

If I am accepted as a brother, am I not part of the family?

And,

"Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to “Catholic unity.”

If my “ecclesial community” is used by His Spirit as a means of salvation (no salvation outside the Catholic Church), then,

the simplistic claim that I am not Catholic, though not in communion with the Bishop of Rome, is, in your words, fraudulent.

But let’s be clear here, my profile claims to be evangelical Catholic, and if that moniker bothers triumpalists on either side, so be it.

Jon

Jon

 

[Cinette]

Spiritual food is true food …for the spirit [soul]. Notice that the Eucharist given during the sacrament of the sick and dying [Last Rites] is called Holy Viaticum. The Catholic Encyclopedia says of it:

“Formerly it meant anything that gave spiritual strength and comfort to the dying and enabled them to make the journey into eternity with greater confidence and security.
. . . But finally it acquired its present fixed, exclusive, and technical sense of Holy Communion given to those in danger of death. The Catechism of the Council of Trent (De Euch. sacr., n. 3) says: ‘Sacred writers call it the Viaticum as well because it is the spiritual food by which we are supported in our mortal pilgrimage, as also because it prepares for us a passage to eternal glory and happiness’”.

*I understand Jesus to mean true flesh and true blood. Spiritual food to me would be grace. I cannot recall the name of the place in Italy but many years ago a priest doubted that the bread and wine turned into the Body and Blood of Jesus. At the consecration he couldn’t believe his eyes when, as he raised the Host, it turned to flesh in his hands!. The wine in the cup turned to blood! The flesh and the blood still exists today and is preserved in a special glass display.

I think the place is called Lancerno and if you google you will find the story with pictures I am sure.

*

 

[Cinette]

Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
As a member of the LCMS [Lutheran Church Missouri Synod] you are not Catholic. So your response to the ‘Religion’ field is erroneous. You cannot be a follower of Martin Luther which, as a member of the LCMS, you are and be Catholic. Luther was a heretic who preached error. I see your description of “evangelical catholic LCMS” as an attempt to wrap yourself in the mantle of the true church of Jesus Christ while maintaining your heretical beliefs. The LCMS, if they follow Martin Luther as they claim they do, denies church authority because they know they have no authority and that includes the authority to bind and loose as well as the authority to forgive or retain sin.

Obviously your own personal opinion which is akin to private interpretation that protestantism is famous for. You are no Catholic at all. In fact, neither you nor any protestant can be considered catholic [small ‘c’] as none of you are truly universal in belief. Once again private interpretation raises negates catholicity. Claim it all you want but it is a fraudulent claim.

*Yes, Luther was a heretic and his actions caused immeasurable damage to Christianity - it split Christianity which then resulted in innumerable splits which we see today. Protestants inherited the damage and are not to blame.

Cinette*

 

[Cinette]

Then he told you falsely! Lutherans do not believe in receptionism. The concept is not in any way expressed in the confessions. Christ clearly said, “This is my body”, not “this will become my body”. you are welcome to invite the pastor here, and I will dispute it with him.
Have you had any experiences with Catholic priests who have gotten Catholic teachings wrong?

Jon

*Oh yes - to your last question. The Church however, never compromises and is firm and this is why she has so many enemies today. The Church stands firm.

As for the pastor I do not have any contact with him.

*