Protestants: Do you believe that Christ is truly present in the communion elements of bread and wine?

[tqualey]

Hi, NonCatholic,

I have been waiting for your response to Benedictus2 post #581

The problem with omissions of particular scriptural texts that specifically disprove what you are trying to prove is an interesting approach to honest dialogue.

The irony of your last statement is profound…and one that should be of serious concern

One must look at whole of Scripture, but the unregenerate religious mind always perverts the truth and will always continue to do so because the natural person does not and cannot understand the Word. That can be changed through the grace of God unto faith through Jesus.

Please don’t continue to play around and attempt to manipulate God’s Word. Having to answer for such mischief on CAF is nothing compred to having to answer to the Author of the this Text.

God bless

 

[protagonist]

The Anglican article is that Christ comes to us in the Eucharist in Spiritual form. So far this is correct for without Spirit, nothing.

Christ also uses the direct words that this is His Body and Blood so there is common ground on the basic instruction. The question is how He comes to us and that is His mystery full stop. If there was also a full stop at the concept of real presence that would be that but REAL PRESENCE is a trojan horse which advanced from the eighth century to become the compulsory transubstantiation of a 13th century Lateran council.This latter is explained by recourse to ancient pagan Greek philosophy where the Eucharist is explained in terms of substance and accidents. Why go beyond a humble acceptance of Christ’s mystery to all this? It stands as a bulwark for the sacerdotal priesthood and it was Wycliffe, who was described as the Morning Star of the Reformation who took his stand specifically on transubstantiation. Serious discussion requires more than triumphalism in the field of dialectic dogmatism. This does not make for progress in understanding, In terms of eternal salvation sins of omission and commission are of much more concern to me than the no room outside the inn postures of Catholic drum banging. Do not forget that Cardinal Humboldt’s anathema and excommunication on the altar of St Sophia in Constantinople excised Rome from all other Apostolic sees and foundations.

 

[grampben]

Now now NonCatholic behave yourself! - play nicely!

:tsktsk: :tsktsk: :tsktsk:

Agreed, but why do you never tell your fellow catholics to play nicely? I have been told here if I’m going to tell off catholics I have to tell off my side too, and I do that. Why don’t you?

 

[Cinette]

Agreed, but why do you never tell your fellow catholics to play nicely? I have been told here if I’m going to tell off catholics I have to tell off my side too, and I do that. Why don’t you?

You are a sweetiepie, you know that?

How do you know that I haven’t told off my fellow Cathoilics? Ahaa!

 

[grampben]

You are a sweetiepie, you know that?

How do you know that I haven’t told off my fellow Cathoilics? Ahaa!

LOL! Fair point

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Hi Benedictus -

It is what I said. At Sunday Mass we have the Liturgy of the Word where we have a passage from the OT, Psalms, Epistle and then the Gospel - all these passages are connected. The scripture provides spiritual food for the soul.

Then we have the Liturgy of the Eucharist which is the very Body and Blood of Jesus.

The Mass has its origin from the Apostles. That is why we are Apostolic and why we have Apostolic Succession.

We have never denied that the Scriptures are food for the soul.

**Hi Cinette,

Another thing that Protestants don’t realize is that all over the world every Catholic church hear the same passage from the OT, Psalms, Epistle and then the same Gospel. The music changes, the language changes but the Word of God feeding the flock is the same everywhere. The Protestants can’t even decide what to do that is simular to each other service because they do not have the structure of the Mass.

I believe that scripture are words for the brain, to increase our knowledge of God. The Euchurist is real food for the soul. It provides our souls with the grace needed to grow closer to God through receiving Jesus’ Body and Blood.He abides in us and Us in Him!

Reference Non-catholic. He attends a church. He pretends to belong to none because of his “Personal relationship with Jesus Christ”. I bet he takes money off his income taxes to some church! I am what is commonly known as a “born again” Catholic! I also have a personal direct relationship with Jesus. I accepted Him as my personal Savior on 14 November 1976 at a Cursillo retreat. That has made me a stronger Catholic thirsting to embrace our lord rather then just warming a pew. The Cursillo movement uses evangelical-sounding words to describe the relationship every Christian should have with Jesus anyway. I am a ACTS brother also! ACT Movement
The Protestants take the words of Jesus in the bible and twist them to believe that they don’t have to do anything except accept Jesus’ gift of our salvation. Non-Catholic I feel is in fact in a personal relationship with Jesus. He just need to eat Jesus’ Body and Blood to obtain eternal life. Lets pray for him and all Protestants that they convert and save their souls from what might might lead to eternal damnation. I said it might, not it would, but might.

On my way to have breakfast with My Lord and Savior!

God Bless **

 

[Realcatholicgk]

LOL! Fair point

**Hi Gramps,

Trust me, she is always balling me out. “Be nicer, talk nicer!” I am as nice and loving as can be Cinette is a real sweetiepie and will convert you with sugar if you aren’t careful! I use the blunt truth thatPprotestants are in danger of lossing their souls. I know she will fuss at me again!
I told her flat out I have a wife and don’t need two! But you know women…

God Bless**

 

[Cinette]

LOL! Fair point

Just as I was posting to you my skype rang and it was my son Aubrey and his wife phoning from Palma da Majorca where they live. A few minutes later a call came from Francoise who lives in Johannesburg and she wanted something and then immediately after that Miniver phoned from the US and my son in Cape Town is coming on business next week.

It is so funny. At one time I used to get calls from them regularly, "Mae (that is Mother in Portuguese) what is Miniver’s phone number? then What is Joao Rui’s number etc etc. So I purchased 4 little phone books and wrote their numbers in each and gave it to them.

Guess what? It didn’t work!

So I am the telephone exchange and Family Network!

I know I am off topic. It is Saturday and I think you must all be getting out of bed. It is presently 3.45pm here and we went out with friends for lunch.

Getting back to the present and the thread. IMHO I think the Catholics on this thread have been very patient, kind, painstakingly genourous, etc. etc. Sometimes they get irate because there are some people who do not debate. They are like those people who have conversations with themselves. While you are talking they have got that glassy blank look as if they are actually working out what they are going to say next and haven’t heard a word you have said! One can never advance in the conversation. That is a great pity.

I think Protestants think we eat babies for breakfast! We are of a different breed to them. If only they knew we are EXACTLY the same - we have red blood in our veins, we cry tears just like them and we love God just like they do. The CC doesn’t belong to us - it is for everybody - theirs too. The intelligent thing would be to pay attention and listen and learn. If they continue to reject then fine but they mustn’t start with their baby talk. Nya, nya, nya, nya, nya (do you know the tune?) Something like that. I have read some absolutely superb postings on this thread and sometimes I think it is just like casting pearls before swine. Hey - don’t get upset now - I am only quoting the Bible.

Anyway, believe it or not I love you all.

 

[NonCatholic]

Cinette;4711328:

Cinette,

With all due respect, Let me hear this from Non Catholic, Cause I want to know his understanding of it.

Oh by the way Cinette, i hav not open your private email as yet I will, when I get back.

God Bless

Ufam Tobie

What is your specific question? I have updated my profile, which may answer your question.

 

[latingirl]

Wow, I have to say, I’m new to this forum and this has been the best discussion yet. I think talking about the Lord’s Supper is so interesting.

I’d like to know when and how Christians started to believe it as symbolic. I’ve seen that the Early Church believed in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
I’ve had a debate like this on another site and it didn’t get anywhere like this one. You all bring up interesting points- Catholic and Protestant (of course, I agree with the Catholics )

I keep studying my Bible but it keeps leading me to the same place- The completion of the Old Testament with the New Testament in Christ’s blood. -That the saving grace of Christ blood continues to pour out when we celebrate His Supper in remembrance of Him.

 

[grampben]

Wow, I have to say, I’m new to this forum and this has been the best discussion yet. I think talking about the Lord’s Supper is so interesting.

I’d like to know when and how Christians started to believe it as symbolic. I’ve seen that the Early Church believed in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
I’ve had a debate like this on another site and it didn’t get anywhere like this one. You all bring up interesting points- Catholic and Protestant (of course, I agree with the Catholics )

I keep studying my Bible but it keeps leading me to the same place- The completion of the Old Testament with the New Testament in Christ’s blood. -That the saving grace of Christ blood continues to pour out when we celebrate His Supper in remembrance of Him.

Earlier on I posted information on memorialism. The most prominent theologian in this are in history is the reformer Huldrych Zwingli. Here is some information on his theology.

 

[benedictus2]

I think Protestants think we eat babies for breakfast!

And as we eat the babies for breakfast we twirl our moustaches and give out an evi llaugh . Mhwwwaaahh!!!

Oops, Francis Ford Copola just yelled “Cut”.

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Wow, I have to say, I’m new to this forum and this has been the best discussion yet. I think talking about the Lord’s Supper is so interesting.

**Hi latin,

Welcome. There are some very nice people here! Even the Protestants aren’t “all” bad! **

I’d like to know when and how Christians started to believe it as symbolic. I’ve seen that the Early Church believed in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

**Actually real Christians never have seen it as symbolic. Jesus said that we had to eat His Body and Drink His blood to be saved. Only Jesus’ real followers with apostolic succession can change the ordinary bread and wine into His Body and Blood.

When the devil stole people from Jesus’ real church he couldn’t have them being saved so he blinded them to the truth. He corrupted their bibles and also their understanding of Jesus’ teachings so they would just drink grape juice and eat bread being happy thinking that it only symbolizes Jesus’ body and thereby condemning them to eternal damnation with him! It worked! Of the 61,000 counterfeit groups only around 500 of them believe in the real presence and they foolishly think they also can change the bread by some trpe of magic. They really misunderstand what Jesus did. He actually changed the bread and wine into His real body and Blood and gave only His diciples and their successors the power to do that! **.
I’ve had a debate like this on another site and it didn’t get anywhere like this one. You all bring up interesting points- Catholic and Protestant (of course, I agree with the Catholics )

I keep studying my Bible but it keeps leading me to the same place- The completion of the Old Testament with the New Testament in Christ’s blood. -That the saving grace of Christ blood continues to pour out when we celebrate His Supper in remembrance of Him.

**It seems like you have gotten it right! We actually join with jesus and his diciples at the last supper and at the cross as He changes the bread and Blood into His Body and Blood and as He saves us by His death. God is Good! **

**God Bless! **

 

[benedictus2]

Here is what you said: “You however are presuming that you have been given the Holy Spirit. The **only instance **that we can be sure that Holy Spirit is there is in the Church.”

You know I’m not a Catholic; not in the “Church”. How else could that be understood?

There are different levels in understanding the Scripture. There is a reading where how you interpret the scripture applies only to yourself. This enlightenment the Holy Spirit does give to invidual. But there is a level to the interpretation of Scripture that is applicable to the entire Church. This is the one that I am talking about.

 

[benedictus2]

Joh 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and **believeth **on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

But what does this “believeth on Him that sent me” mean?

The Muslims believe in Jesus. They believe in Allah who is the Father of Jesus who sent Jesus.

The Buddhists believe in Jesus. They think he is a good man.

The heretics believed in “The Father of Jesus who sent Him” but they beleived Jesus was only a man.

So what does it mean to believe in Jesus and the Father?

We get an idea of what that means in John 6. Those who did not believe in Him walked away.

If you truly believe in Him, you will know that He speaks the truth when He says that when you eat His flesh and drink His blood you will have eternal life.

That is what it means to believe in Jesus and on the Father who sent Him.

 

[benedictus2]

Hi Benedictus -

It is what I said. At Sunday Mass we have the Liturgy of the Word where we have a passage from the OT, Psalms, Epistle and then the Gospel - all these passages are connected. The scripture provides spiritual food for the soul.

Then we have the Liturgy of the Eucharist which is the very Body and Blood of Jesus.

The Mass has its origin from the Apostles. That is why we are Apostolic and why we have Apostolic Succession.

We have never denied that the Scriptures are food for the soul.

I like what Leif Erickson said about this on the thread “To live by faith”

He said something like.: in the Liturgy of the Word we hear the good news proclaimed. We hear about he Word made Flesh. This is like a heralding of what is to come next.

For in a few moments, having heard about the Word Made Flesh, we now truly recieve the Word Made Flesh in the Eucharist.

 

[benedictus2]

Anyway, believe it or not I love you all.

And I believe you! :hug1:

 

[NonCatholic]

Wow, I have to say, I’m new to this forum and this has been the best discussion yet. I think talking about the Lord’s Supper is so interesting.

I’d like to know when and how Christians started to believe it as symbolic. I’ve seen that the Early Church believed in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
I’ve had a debate like this on another site and it didn’t get anywhere like this one. You all bring up interesting points- Catholic and Protestant (of course, I agree with the Catholics )

I keep studying my Bible but it keeps leading me to the same place- The completion of the Old Testament with the New Testament in Christ’s blood. -That the saving grace of Christ blood continues to pour out when we celebrate His Supper in remembrance of Him.

It all started in the Upper Room on the day the passover Lambs were slaughtered.

Luke 22:19 And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.”

Body refers to the sacrifice on the cross only. Remembrance = Anamnesis (noun feminine) Defined: to remember and weigh well and consider - The definition is interesting because it is more than remembering, it something to ponder on and appreciate. This also fares well with approaching the Lord’s Supper in a worthy manner by examining ourselves. In the verb form it is remembering with admonishment (To remind of something forgotten or disregarded, as an obligation or a responsibility.)

This noun form is used in 1Corthians 4:17, Mark 11:21 and Hebrews 10:30 & 10:32

Notice in verse 20 “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.” here Jesus expounds on the significance of His blood being shed as a promise of the New Covenant - notice He said “in My blood”, not “drink my blood”.

1 Corinthians 11:23-26 “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 {He took} the cup also 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 proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.”

 

[NonCatholic]

There are different levels in understanding the Scripture. There is a reading where how you interpret the scripture applies only to yourself. This enlightenment the Holy Spirit does give to invidual. But there is a level to the interpretation of Scripture that is applicable to the entire Church. This is the one that I am talking about.

You need to go back and look at the posts associated with the above…the topic is your condemnation of myself, which is implicit in your comment; since I am not in the Catholic fold…which is fine, you have your opinion and beliefs.

 

[NonCatholic]

The one you eat is indeed just a bland wafer. Not so what we eat. We eat the Body and Blood of Christ and we have that by the authority of His word. We have not cannibalised Jesus. We took Him at His word.

You decided to ignore Him. It is like He is telling you eat my flesh, drink my blood and you are going “Shhhh. You don’t mean that. What you really want to say is that I must believe in you”. And Jesus just keeps pressing on saying again “Amen, amen I say to you…” and you keep going. No Lord, stop it. Tthat’s not what you mean at all.

And as I have replied to you before. Every one who heard them knew he was talking in metaphors (not euphemisms) by the way. That is why you do not hear them complaining.

The word “eat” by itself can indeed be understood in the way you say. However, the entire phrase “eat my flesh” cannot be understood metaphorically in that manner because in Jewish idiom " to eat one’s flesh" means to do someone an injury. And if you place that Jesus discourse, it would look like he was saying “If you injur me, I will give you eternal life” which makes Him sound very stupid indeed. And you and I know He is far from being that.

Yes, and notice how he says this very early in the discourse. Because it will require a deep belief in Jesus to be able to accept the hard teaching that was to follow. Those who could not accept the hard teaching left because they did not believe enough in Jesus.

He is in actual fact preparing them for the verses that will ask them to eat His flesh and drink His blood.

Yes, very consistent. How? How will we not hunger and how will we not thirst. Because He will give us his flesh and blood to drink.

If you come to him you will not hunger precisely because He will give you His flesh to eat, If you believe in Him you you will never thirst precisely because He will give you His blood to drink.

He means to feed and be immersed in Him spiritually, not literally. He is speaking of spiritual food, not carnal food.