Protestants' eucharist and corinthians

[jcrichton]

Even for Catholics its not about how many times you go to communion. Communion doesn’t automatically make you holy. It gives an influx of actual grace so the person can become holy. Protestants believe this happens on a daily basis, sometimes at communion, but it is not necessary to have communion. The Bible doesn’t say physical communion is necessary. That is a canon law of the Church.

Post #20

 

[jcrichton]

I want to be very careful not to misinterpret the Bible. Does Corinthians mean “not discerning the Lord’s body as physically present” or discerning the body in another sense? I am use to the Catholic interpretation, and new interpretations can seem odd when you are not use to them. So, is it definitely certain that the Catholic interpretation is the only interpretation the text allows??

Hi!

…your argument seems sound… however, there are only two meanings of the Lord’s Body:

• Christ’s Actual Body: this is by Body, this is my Blood
• Christ’s Mystical Body: the Church

…do you mean to understand that St. Paul is inferring that when we eat the Bread and drink the Wine we are to discern the Church?

…and if we are to discern the Church, would that be the early Church, or the Catholic Church, or the Protestant church, or that “invisible” church of some protestants, or any body/group of people who gather together and Jesus is “mentioned” within their assembly?

…do you see the error of interpretation?

A person cannot sin by not discerning a symbol!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[thinkandmull]

Recognizing the body as present is much more easy for my mind to accept as an interpretation. But why do Protestants feel comfortable interpreting it to mean something else?

 

[thinkandmull]

“anyone who eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will be behaving unworthily towards the body and blood of the Lord”. They say that Christ is blasphemed by playing with the Last Supper. “a person who eats and drinks without recognising the Body”. Could it mean recognizing the body of Jesus as God’s body?

 

[De_Maria]

Even for Catholics its not about how many times you go to communion.

Who said it was about “how many times you go to communion”?

Communion doesn’t automatically make you holy.

Who said “communion automatically makes you holy”?

It gives an influx of actual grace so the person can become holy.

No. It gives an outpouring of SANCTIFYING grace so the individual can abide in habitual virtue.

Protestants believe this happens on a daily basis,

So do Catholics. Actual grace is the everyday grace provided to do the simplest things. Like breathing and smiling.

Sanctifying grace is the grace to continue being children of God.

sometimes at communion,

Always at communion properly received.

but it is not necessary to have communion.

Christ says it is. See John 6.

The Bible doesn’t say physical communion is necessary.

It does. You just don’t believe it.

That is a canon law of the Church.

Both NT Scripture and Canon Law are based upon the sacred Traditions of Jesus Christ.

 

[De_Maria]

I want to be very careful not to misinterpret the Bible. Does Corinthians mean “not discerning the Lord’s body as physically present” or discerning the body in another sense? I am use to the Catholic interpretation, and new interpretations can seem odd when you are not use to them. So, is it definitely certain that the Catholic interpretation is the only interpretation the text allows??

Yes. NT Scripture is written based upon the Traditions that Jesus passed down through the Church. Protestants read Scripture to learn their interpretation of what it says. Catholics read Scripture in order to better understand the Teaching of the infallible Church that Jesus Christ established to Teach what He commanded.

 

[De_Maria]

Recognizing the body as present is much more easy for my mind to accept as an interpretation. But why do Protestants feel comfortable interpreting it to mean something else?

Because they reject the Traditions which Jesus passed down through His Church.

 

[De_Maria]

“anyone who eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will be behaving unworthily towards the body and blood of the Lord”. They say that Christ is blasphemed by playing with the Last Supper. “a person who eats and drinks without recognising the Body”. Could it mean recognizing the body of Jesus as God’s body?

It means without believing that It is the real body, blood , soul and divinity of Jesus Christ.

 

[De_Maria]

Hello,

Hi. Thanks for your question. After following this thread for a while, I believe anyone should be able to see that your question is based on a false premise. Let’s break it down.

If Protestants, as some do, believe that receiving their communion is as important an event as when Catholic’s receive communion,

You have proven this is not true in the various messages in this thread.

First - they don’t consider it necessary for salvation. We do. See John 6 where Jesus says we must eat His Flesh and drink His Blood in order to receive eternal life and abide in

Then, you say they only believe they receive actual grace. The Catholic Church says we receive Sanctifying which is a participation in eternal life.

We haven’t even touched on the admission that they consider the bread and wine to remain symbols and do not accept they have been transubstantiated.

does this mean that Corinthians cannot be used to prove that Jesus is actually eaten?

For the reasons stated above, the answer remains, no.

Thank you

You’re welcome.

 

[thinkandmull]

John 6 was referring to those who were there. It was different from when He said “unless A MAN be born against of water and the spirit”. The Eucharist is not necessary for salvation. It gives the actual grace to receive much sanctifying grace, but it doesn’t automatically give sanctifying grace. That grace must be merited by the will cooperating with the Eucharist. A lot of Catholics think “I must be holy because I just received communion” but it doesn’t work that way. It’s actual grace helps merit the sanctifying grace. The point about the Protestants is that they believe they too participate in the Last Supper. They don’t consider it spiritually necessary for Jesus to be physically eaten. They desire all the spiritual benefits but don’t see a necessary connection between physical presence and influx of actual grace. The point of the thread was about their interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:23-32

 

[JMM1957]

John 6 was referring to those who were there. It was different from when He said “unless A MAN be born against of water and the spirit”. The Eucharist is not necessary for salvation. It gives the actual grace to receive much sanctifying grace, but it doesn’t automatically give sanctifying grace. That grace must be merited by the will cooperating with the Eucharist. A lot of Catholics think “I must be holy because I just received communion” but it doesn’t work that way. It’s actual grace helps merit the sanctifying grace. The point about the Protestants is that they believe they too participate in the Last Supper. They don’t consider it spiritually necessary for Jesus to be physically eaten. They desire all the spiritual benefits but don’t see a necessary connection between physical presence and influx of actual grace. The point of the thread was about their interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:23-32

For those adult Catholics (excluding infants and children) who have been instructed properly in the understanding of the Eucharist, that it is the real presence, body, blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, for those people it is necessary for salvation to partake.

 

[De_Maria]

John 6 was referring to those who were there. It was different from when He said “unless A MAN be born against of water and the spirit”.

I don’t see any difference:

John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down out of heaven.** If anyone **eats of this bread, he will live forever. Yes, the bread which I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

52 The Jews therefore contended with one another, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

53 Jesus therefore said to them, “Most certainly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you don’t have life in yourselves. 54 **He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, **and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 **He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me, and I in him. **57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father; so he who feeds on me, he will also live because of me.

That doesn’t say anything about only those who are present.

The Eucharist is not necessary for salvation.

Eternal life is salvation. Christ said, "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you don’t have life in yourselves. "

It gives the actual grace to receive much sanctifying grace, but it doesn’t automatically give sanctifying grace.

All the Sacraments give sanctifying grace. Period. And no Protestant religion believes in sanctifying grace.

That grace must be merited by the will cooperating with the Eucharist. A lot of Catholics think “I must be holy because I just received communion” but it doesn’t work that way.

This conversation is not about what “a lot of Catholics think”. It’s about what the Catholic Church Teaches about the Eucharist vs what your group of Protestants teach.

It’s actual grace helps merit the sanctifying grace.

Don’t tell me that your group of Protestants believes in merit? That’s a new one.

The point about the Protestants is that they believe they too participate in the Last Supper.

They are wrong.

First, I doubt that they consider it the Sacrifice of Calvary. Ask them if they agree with this Teaching:

1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: …

You’ll find that they deny it.

2nd. In order for it to be the self same sacrifice of Calvary, it must the Real Body and Blood of the Lord. Symbols don’t hack it.

3rd. There is another aspect of the once for all sacrifice which Protestants find grotesque. It is expressed very beautifully in Scripture:

1 Peter 2:21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

In other words, the Eucharist is the Sacrifice of Calvary and we unite ourselves to it:

1368 The Eucharist is also the sacrifice of the Church. The Church which is the Body of Christ participates in the offering of her Head. With him, she herself is offered whole and entire. …

They don’t consider it spiritually necessary for Jesus to be physically eaten. They desire all the spiritual benefits but don’t see a necessary connection between physical presence and influx of actual grace. The point of the thread was about their interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:23-32

And the point has been answered. They believe errors. They have no authority to confect the Eucharist. They don’t believe remotely close to what the Church Teaches. They don’t consider it as important as the Catholic Church does because they have no idea what the Eucharist truly is nor it’s intrinsic value.

They are the blind leading the blind. They have fallen in a hole. They are flailing around in the dark looking for guides to tickle their ears with lies that make them feel good about themselves.

The Catholic Church is the instrument which Jesus Christ established to Teach His Truths to the entire world and throughout time. They need to listen to Christ, through His Church.

 

[JMM1957]

John 6 was referring to those who were there. It was different from when He said “unless A MAN be born against of water and the spirit”. The Eucharist is not necessary for salvation. It gives the actual grace to receive much sanctifying grace, but it doesn’t automatically give sanctifying grace. That grace must be merited by the will cooperating with the Eucharist. A lot of Catholics think “I must be holy because I just received communion” but it doesn’t work that way. It’s actual grace helps merit the sanctifying grace. The point about the Protestants is that they believe they too participate in the Last Supper. They don’t consider it spiritually necessary for Jesus to be physically eaten. They desire all the spiritual benefits but don’t see a necessary connection between physical presence and influx of actual grace. The point of the thread was about their interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:23-32

They participate in it, but its not the same Last Supper that Paul is instructing the Corinthians about. Paul may as well be speaking directly to them today. I realize that they are sincere in their practice, but its a faulty one and lacking full meaning.

 

[thinkandmull]

Most people interpret the first part of John 6 to refer to salvation, not necessarily the Eucharist. The Church doesn’t teach that communion is a necessity of means, but prescribes it as a necessity of precept. Also, all the priests I’ve talked to say that you receive from the sacraments what your will puts into it. To believe sacraments give grace without good will acting with actual grace is to believe in false works. You won’t convert any Protestants with such a stance. I still go to Mass but I don’t think 1 Peter 2:21 proves it is Biblical. My intention is not so much to play the devil’s advocate to find truth. I am sincerely trying to find rock solid evidence that Catholic apologetics works.

 

[De_Maria]

Most people interpret the first part of John 6 to refer to salvation, not necessarily the Eucharist.

No one said otherwise. But the end of John 6, from v 48 onward, is about the Eucharist.

The Church doesn’t teach that communion is a necessity of means, but prescribes it as a necessity of precept.

If you say so. Here’s what the Catechism says:

I. THE EUCHARIST - SOURCE AND SUMMIT OF ECCLESIAL LIFE

1324 The Eucharist is "the source and summit of the Christian life."136 "The other sacraments, and indeed all ecclesiastical ministries and works of the apostolate, are bound up with the Eucharist and are oriented toward it. For in the blessed Eucharist is contained the whole spiritual good of the Church, namely Christ himself, our Pasch."137

1325 "The Eucharist is the efficacious sign and sublime cause of that communion in the divine life and that unity of the People of God by which the Church is kept in being. It is the culmination both of God’s action sanctifying the world in Christ and of the worship men offer to Christ and through him to the Father in the Holy Spirit."138

1326 Finally, by the Eucharistic celebration we already unite ourselves with the heavenly liturgy and anticipate eternal life, when God will be all in all.139

1327 In brief, the Eucharist is the sum and summary of our faith: "Our way of thinking is attuned to the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn confirms our way of thinking."140

Also, all the priests I’ve talked to say that you receive from the sacraments what your will puts into it. To believe sacraments give grace without good will acting with actual grace is to believe in false works.

True.

You won’t convert any Protestants with such a stance.

I don’t try to convert anyone. I just tell the truth. God converts them when they are ready.

Are you looking for someone to give you an excuse to leave the Catholic Church? Or someone to give you a reason to stay?

I’m afraid THAT is between you and God. Unless God gives you the grace to believe, you will not do it. It is to Him that you must turn, in prayer.

I still go to Mass

You “still” go to Mass? What? Out of duty? Then that’s good. Continue doing so and begin praying to God for enlightenment.

but I don’t think 1 Peter 2:21 proves it is Biblical.

There are plenty of other verses that do. You mentioned one in your OP. But no amount of proof texting will persuade a person who is determined to leave the Church. If you refuse to believe the Instrument that God put on this earth to Teach what He commanded, you will refuse to believe the Bible. Because the Church which wrote the New Testament, is the Instrument which God placed here to Teach the Christian Faith.

My intention is not so much to play the devil’s advocate to find truth. I am sincerely trying to find rock solid evidence that Catholic apologetics works.

Works for what? Plenty of people are persuaded by Catholic Apologetics. But, in the famous words of the Wizard of Oz, they have something you don’t. The understanding that God placed His Church here to Teach the Faith infallibly. And that it is our duty to submit and obey the Church, as we would Jesus Christ. Because it is truly Jesus Christ who speaks through His Church:

Hebrews 13:17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

 

[jcrichton]

Recognizing the body as present is much more easy for my mind to accept as an interpretation. But why do Protestants feel comfortable interpreting it to mean something else?

Hi!

…I don’t know the generation in which you grew up… but if you study the US history (recent) you find that society held very sound values… then the “age or enlightenment and liberty” come upon… people would frown at being thought of as drunkard or adulterous… mischievous children only needed to see an adult in the vicinity before they corrected their bad behavior… as society changed alcoholics, drug addicts, and the adulterous and immoral became the “heroes” to be emulated.

Sadly, “Christians” have been on that same path to “freedom.” They have adapted their theology to mean what they need it to mean so that their tenets can be thought of as sound…

…consider the Jehovah Witnesses and others who profess to be in Fellowship with Yahweh God while denouncing Christ’s Divinity and the Holy Trinity–as contorted as it may be, they interpret the Word of God in manners that reject God’s Revelation while claiming that they fallow sound doctrine.

…any theology that rejects the Word of God or that redefines the Word of God to mean whatever tenets it holds, it is a human construct which subordinates God to man’s vision of God…

Remove Christ’s Church from history and you have hundreds, nay, thousands of theologies–all contradicting each other and all claiming to be the “true inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”

…just ask yourself, why is it that one thing the unites all factions of Protestantism is their rejection and loathing of the Catholic Church?:

2 They will expel you from the synagogues, and indeed the hour is coming when anyone who kills you will think he is doing a holy duty for God. 3 They will do these things because they have never known either the Father or myself.

(St. John 16:2-3)
…this persecution of the Church was not a prophecy for the Emerging Church… it is patent till the Parousia… even as recent as the 20th century, right here in the West, the Church was persecuted and Catholics put to death… because they were Christ’s Followers, according to the Apostolic Teaching.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

John 6 was referring to those who were there. It was different from when He said “unless A MAN be born against of water and the spirit”. The Eucharist is not necessary for salvation. It gives the actual grace to receive much sanctifying grace, but it doesn’t automatically give sanctifying grace. That grace must be merited by the will cooperating with the Eucharist. A lot of Catholics think “I must be holy because I just received communion” but it doesn’t work that way. It’s actual grace helps merit the sanctifying grace. The point about the Protestants is that they believe they too participate in the Last Supper. They don’t consider it spiritually necessary for Jesus to be physically eaten. They desire all the spiritual benefits but don’t see a necessary connection between physical presence and influx of actual grace. The point of the thread was about their interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:23-32

Hi!

…you’ve hit it on the head: “unworthily.”

…both Catholics who simply go through the motion ('if I have Communion I’ll be “Saved”) without observing/perceiving Christ’s actual Body and Blood as well as anyone who does so as a symbolic act are receiving Christ’s Body and Blood unworthily.

…perhaps the way you worded your statements made it difficult to differentiate the aim/goal of your OP; for my part on this misunderstanding, I apologize.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Most people interpret the first part of John 6 to refer to salvation, not necessarily the Eucharist. The Church doesn’t teach that communion is a necessity of means, but prescribes it as a necessity of precept. Also, all the priests I’ve talked to say that you receive from the sacraments what your will puts into it. To believe sacraments give grace without good will acting with actual grace is to believe in false works. You won’t convert any Protestants with such a stance. I still go to Mass but I don’t think 1 Peter 2:21 proves it is Biblical. My intention is not so much to play the devil’s advocate to find truth. I am sincerely trying to find rock solid evidence that Catholic apologetics works.

Hi!

…the problem you have is Faith!

…it is not about apologetics… it is about Obedience to Christ: Who Delegated His Authority to the Church: Who is Led and Guided by the Holy Spirit.

…your quest will be void till you accept that Christ did what He did and He Commanded what He Commanded… until then you will be a slave to man’s machinations… remember the Sacrament of Matrimony–well, first, all Christians accepted it; then they gave themselves liberties; then the Church imposed the Sacramental Doctrine; then the separated brothers embraced divorce as they rejected the Sacrament–now some separated brothers are ignoring the Teachings against homosexuality… some have even embraced and elevated homosexuality to a religious experience…

…the default setting for Protestantism is to protest against the Church… could they actually be protesting against the Church as a means to guise their protestation against Yahweh God?

Maran atha!

Angel