Protestants: Why don't you follow his command? "Eat My Flesh and Drink My Blood"

[St.Eric]

JSmitty2005:

As Catholics, we worship the Eucharist as the same Body and Blood of Christ that became incarnate in the womb of the BVM and died on Calvary for our sins. Just because the Eucharist doesn’t look like that doesn’t make it untrue. Similarly, Jesus didn’t look like God when He walked this earth but He certainly was.

The burning bush also did not look like God, but at the time it certainly was; that was the form he chose to take.

 

[JoeyWarren]

The question is if the Eucharist is a commandment.

DO this in rememberence of me. We take the DO as a commandment. Like wise, if don’t do it, then in essence one is not remembering Christ…

 

[JSmitty2005]

JoeyWarren:

ruzz:

The question is if the Eucharist is a commandment.

DO this in rememberence of me. We take the DO as a commandment. Like wise, if don’t do it, then in essence one is not remembering Christ…

The first Christians seemed to interpret “DO THIS” as a command considering that “they devoted themselves…to the breaking of the bread” (Acts 2:42). This always confounded me since Protestants have devoted themselves so much to Bible studies or good preaching or exciting, entertaining performances rather than the Eucharist.

 

[St.Eric]

When I tell my children to DO something, they had better DO it or there will be consequences. Dad just gave them a command-ment, and if they don’t comply, then they have to pay the price.

 

[Mickey]

ruzz:

You added early church fathers and I gave my reasons why I don’t use them. Some people get very upset when you don’t recognize early church fathers as 1st generation experts. This is no exception.

The doctrine of the Real Presence is quite clear as we read Scripture. It is throughout the Bible–John 6, 1 Cor, last supper doscourse. etc., etc. The early Church fathers were witnesses to this clear and continuous truth. They understood this then as do all Catholics and Orthodox do today.

ruzz:

The first reformers were Catholics and believed in the Eucharist. I think Lutherans today still do. So I don’t take their word for it either.

You speak of an understanding being many generations removed from Christ and the Apostles, yet you are adhering to an understanding that was not seriously set forth until the time of Zwingli! That’s pretty far from the source!

ruzz:

For my job, I have needed to train many people in my day. They in turn have had to train people. From experience, the further from the source, the more distorted the training becomes. Even direct trainees have misunderstood BIG TIME and gotten what I taught them wrong. Therefore, Ignatius is not immune from this phenomenon. He could have VERY easily gotten it wrong and perpetuated it from thereon.

I’ve heard such analogies in the past. Frankly, comparing the people you train at your job, with the fact that St Ignatius perhaps misunderstand such an important teaching from the mouth of St John the Apostle, does not hold much water with me.

Peace,
Mickey

 

[JoeyWarren]

Mickey:

The doctrine of the Real Presence is quite clear as we read Scripture. It is throughout the Bible–John 6, 1 Cor, last supper doscourse. etc., etc. The early Church fathers were witnesses to this clear and continuous truth. They understood this then as do all Catholics and Orthodox do today.
You speak of an understanding being many generations removed from Christ and the Apostles, yet you are adhering to an understanding that was not seriously set forth until the time of Zwingli! That’s pretty far from the source!
I’ve heard such analogies in the past. Frankly, comparing the people you train at your job, with the fact that St Ignatius perhaps misunderstand such an important teaching from the mouth of St John the Apostle, does not hold much water with me.

Peace,
Mickey

It doesn’t hold water for me either.

 

[Mickey]

Mickey:

The doctrine of the Real Presence is quite clear as we read Scripture. It is throughout the Bible–John 6, 1 Cor, last supper doscourse. etc., etc. The early Church fathers were witnesses to this clear and continuous truth. They understood this then as do all Catholics and Orthodox do today.

doscourse = discourse

Mickey:

Frankly, comparing the people you train at your job, with the fact that St Ignatius perhaps **misunderstand **such an important teaching from the mouth of St John the Apostle, does not hold much water with me.

misunderstand = misunderstood

oops. Typing too fast today!

 

[JSmitty2005]

This thread is a perfect example of how Protestants must reinterpret virtually every part of Scripture to maintain their pre-conceived theological infrastructure. It’s called eisegesis and it’s wrong. They resort to spiritualizing topics like the Eucharist and the Church when there are really no Scriptural grounds for doing so other than to maintain the integrity of their theology.

 

[Mickey]

JSmitty2005:

This thread is a perfect example of how Protestants must reinterpret virtually every part of Scripture to maintain their pre-conceived theological infrastructure. It’s called eisegesis and it’s wrong. They resort to spiritualizing topics like the Eucharist and the Church when there are really no Scriptural grounds for doing so other than to maintain the integrity of their theology.

Yes. This is true.
They have no choice because to admit that their theological infrastructure is crumbling would mean they would cease to be protestant. This reinterpretation is especially difficult for them regarding the Eucharist because the Zwinglian ground is not very firm.

 

[ruzz]

JoeyWarren:

DO this in rememberence of me. We take the DO as a commandment. Like wise, if don’t do it, then in essence one is not remembering Christ…

I agree that He gave a commandment. It’s what He commanded that is the question.

We are commanded to remember Him. Don’t we all? Before you eat, don’t you remember Him?

Is Eucharist (eating God) a commandment?

 

[ruzz]

Mickey:

The doctrine of the Real Presence is quite clear as we read Scripture.

As it is quite clear to a billion people who have read this without the influence of The Church and it’s teachings, that it means something else.
I can see a case for the RCC interpretation. Many have given good reasons and they are not without justification. But when I look at this scripture without the lens of The Church, meditate on it, I see something completely different. I see the context and the lesson Jesus was teaching.

So we simply disagree. This won’t be resolved on a message forum.

You speak of an understanding being many generations removed from Christ and the Apostles, yet you are adhering to an understanding that was not seriously set forth until the time of Zwingli! That’s pretty far from the source!

Many terms I hear on this forum I’ve never heard of before. What is “Zwingli”? My SOURCE are the words of Jesus Christ, not Zwqingli. I am free to think for myself. I know slavery is wrong and I don’t need a history book or an abolishonist to explain that to me. It is Jesus Christ that I source, not men years later. When I read His words, I understand them. There is no tradition influencing my beliefs.

I’ve heard such analogies in the past. Frankly, comparing the people you train at your job, with the fact that St Ignatius perhaps misunderstand such an important teaching from the mouth of St John the Apostle, does not hold much water with me.

Then that is it. You believe a man 1900 years ago understood exactly what Christ meant without flaws or influence of the culture or environment of the day.
I don’t. I’ve seen my own experiences of teachings being misunderstood and even those of Apostles. So I see no reason to believe St. Ignatius couldn’t have made the same honest mistakes of any man and gotten it wrong. Given the culture of Rome, it’s easy to see how it could be understood that way and once you create a tradition, changing it is almost impossible.

So that is the line of disagreement.

God Bless

Pax vobiscum.

 

[ruzz]

Mickey:

They have no choice because to admit that their theological infrastructure is crumbling would mean they would cease to be xxxxx. This reinterpretation is especially difficult for them regarding the Eucharist because the yyyyy ground is not very firm.

Do you realize that your words can be used by non-catholic Christians?

-Pax vobiscum

 

[Mannyfit75]

ruzz:

I agree that He gave a commandment. It’s what He commanded that is the question.

We are commanded to remember Him. Don’t we all? Before you eat, don’t you remember Him?

Is Eucharist (eating God) a commandment?

Jesus said, “Whoever eats my flesh and drink my blood shall have eternal life.”

He commanded his apostles at the last supper. “Do this in remembrance of me.”

So we have to eat his flesh and drink his blood.

Let me quote the 1 Corinthians 12:23-32

For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you that the Lord Jesus Christ, on the night he was handed over, took bread, and after had given thanks, broke it and said, ‘This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This is the cup of the new covenant in my blood. Do this as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For as often as you eat this bread, and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes in glory. Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats the and drinks without disconcerning the body, eats, and drinks judgement on himself."

 

[SDAgirl]

St.Eric:

Yes, yes. The Lutherans and the Anglicans. I can’t think of any others. (that’s why I said in the OP “with a couple of exceptions”).

I am Adventist and we celebrate communion every 12 weeks (Sabbaths) as a symbol. It is a very special time, which I feel personally, would lose its value if done daily. Plus, the apostles didn’t take communion daily either. They came together to eat a few times but it wasnt always communion.

 

[Eden]

SDAgirl:

I am Adventist and we celebrate communion every 12 weeks (Sabbaths) as a symbol. It is a very special time, which I feel personally, would lose its value if done daily. Plus, the apostles didn’t take communion daily either. They came together to eat a few times but it wasnt always communion.

Do you think praying done daily loses its value as well? Does your church have a tradition of praying only every 12 weeks? Of having services every 12 weeks?

Can you show me where it says in the Bible that we must not receive Communion daily and where it says we must receive Communion only every 12 weeks. (12 weeks specifically - otherwise, this is an “Adventist tradition” not the Word of God).

 

[JoeyWarren]

SDAgirl, you opened yourself up to that one.

 

[JSmitty2005]

ruzz:

Do you realize that your words can be used by non-catholic Christians?

-Pax vobiscum

No, it can’t. Catholics haven’t *re-interpreted * anything. We believe in the age-old literal interpretation that the Church has always taught forever and will always.

 

[JSmitty2005]

SDAgirl:

I am Adventist and we celebrate communion every 12 weeks (Sabbaths) as a symbol. It is a very special time, which I feel personally, would lose its value if done daily. Plus, the apostles didn’t take communion daily either. They came together to eat a few times but it wasnt always communion.

Acts 2:42 says that the early Christians “devoted themselves…to the breaking of the bread.” Usually when someone is *devoted * to something, they don’t do it once every 3 months.

 

[ruzz]

Eden:

Do you think praying done daily loses its value as well? Does your church have a tradition of praying only every 12 weeks? Of having services every 12 weeks?

Can you show me where it says in the Bible that we must not receive Communion daily and where it says we must receive Communion only every 12 weeks. (12 weeks specifically - otherwise, this is an “Adventist tradition” not the Word of God).

Where do you then draw the line?

To make a silly point:

Why not have a priest go into a bakery and bless every piece of bread? That way every sandwich we eat will be Eucharist.

Why not bless the city reservoir so all the water in our pipes is holy water?

What if you ate the whole “plate” of host? Would that gain you more than a single wafer?

These are silly questions, but it begs the question of how often? How much? Did the Apostles just eat a bite or the whole loaf?

 

[Eden]

ruzz:

Where do you then draw the line?

To make a silly point:

Why not have a priest go into a bakery and bless every piece of bread? That way every sandwich we eat will be Eucharist.

Why not bless the city reservoir so all the water in our pipes is holy water?

What if you ate the whole “plate” of host? Would that gain you more than a single wafer?

These are silly questions, but it begs the question of how often? How much? Did the Apostles just eat a bite or the whole loaf?

Please read the progression from SDAgirl’s post to mine. You will see that it is SDAgirl who uses the argument that receiving the Eucharist daily lessons its significance, not I. Your expansion of the idea does not counter my question, it only enhances it. Thanks.