Question on Catholic beliefs and practices for non-Catholics

[Wannano]

Why is this interesting? It should be no surprise that I believe their is a lack of accuracy to an Evangelical Communion. I don’t say this prideful! I told you I struggle to partake worthily! But by His grace I am welcome. And by His grace, I can be clean. We all can.

Thank you. I think we have to be careful of relativism, but respect each other too. I don’t mind sharing, because I have peace and joy in sharing. And I don’t need to convert others. Would I like all Christians to be at one table? Of course. But I know the reasons why we are not varies tremendously. Some think they are all the same table, while others hate other’s tables. I think the former is much better off, but neither is the goal.

I compare these tables to rooms on the Ark. Jesus is the Ark, and all Christians are on it. But some are devils among us. And then, some have stopped sharing meal at the dining hall, where the Captain has prepared the meal. They form their own groups in separate rooms because they saw abuse in the dining hall, or their parents taught them to eat there. The food is from the Ark, but it is not what the Captain prepared, nor is it where He invited all.

That’s a little bit of how I see it.

Good morning rc, you asked why it is interesting …I had told you why in the next sentence but maybe you missed it.

I am also thinking of an analogy but need more time. Trouble is analogies always break down but they can provide food for thought. Maybe you can help me start because that is as far as I get. I am trying to start the analogy looking from a Catholic perspective so then wouldn’t the ocean be Jesus and the ark the Catholic Church?

 

[rcwitness]

Good morning rc, you asked why it is interesting …I had told you why in the next sentence but maybe you missed it.

I am also thinking of an analogy but need more time. Trouble is analogies always break down but they can provide food for thought. Maybe you can help me start because that is as far as I get. I am trying to start the analogy looking from a Catholic perspective so then wouldn’t the ocean be Jesus and the ark the Catholic Church?

Sure… I agree, analogies can break down, when pressed further. But they have good purpose for expressing points of view.

I would maybe incorporate that Jesus gave a food of the Covenant. And it would be like saying, “eat this Fish” while taking a Tuna. Then some decided to eat other fish (mackerel, Sea Bass, Tilapia, etc.). Even though they are still practicing and accepting other tenants of the Covenant. So they aren’t condemned, but aren’t following completely, perfectly, and lawfully (regarding this commandment).

 

[Wannano]

Wannano, here is another question:

If we receive Jesus in our hearts, and we know Him in Spirit, why do we need to “remember” Him through eating bread and wine?

If bread and wine are perishable elements, that do not give life, why do we use them as a symbol of receiving the Spirit and Life? It seems counter productive for Jesus to use what doesn’t give life (mere bread and wine) to symbolize what does give life.

I am not “anti-symbolic” but stress the greater practice of the symbols actually becoming (in Truth) what they symbolize. What they symbolize is the sacrificed body and blood of Jesus. Therefore, when they become the objects of our worship, they are not worshiped as bread and wine, but both the flesh and blood of Jesus AND His Spirit and Life. For we did not receive the latter without the give former.

I will attempt to answer you the best I can. There are others out there more scholarly than I so I hope they will contribute if I am not conveying accurately.

We don’t need to partake of communion to "remember " Him as in “forget about” Him because of the very fact that He resides in our heart and lives His life within us. Eating the bread and wine as He instituted is remembering what He endured and sacrificed for the privilege we have of having Him 24/7/365. Humans have a tendency to eventually take things for granted.

We use the perishable elements as symbols because that is exactly what they are, perishable.
There is no change in the perishable nature of the Catholic host and wine after consecration either is there? We receive Jesus by asking and allowing Him to be Lord of our life, living with Him in each moment, not by eating as you termed it “mere bread and wine” periodically. Please note that I am not in any way being sarcastic in my reply. You mention that it seems counter productive for Jesus to use elements that do not give life to symbolize what does give life. To my way of thinking it makes perfect sense for Him to do that very thing. He did that a lot.

Your last question is where we probably differ the most. We do not see where Jesus ever meant for the bread and wine to be objects of worship. In fact that is idolatry if they do not somehow actually become His flesh and blood. I guess it is hard for me to understand and believe that if all Jesus wanted and required of us to receive Him and live with Him is to do what the CC practices in the Mass why He did not more clearly explain that. His message seems more like a personal relationship with each individual is what He established.

Thank you.

 

[Wannano]

Sure… I agree, analogies can break down, when pressed further. But they have good purpose for expressing points of view.

I would maybe incorporate that Jesus gave a food of the Covenant. And it would be like saying, “eat this Fish” while taking a Tuna. Then some decided to eat other fish (mackerel, Sea Bass, Tilapia, etc.). Even though they are still practicing and accepting other tenants of the Covenant. So they aren’t condemned, but aren’t following completely, perfectly, and lawfully (regarding this commandment).

But He said bread and wine which we both use?

 

[rcwitness]

But He said bread and wine which we both use?

Then why not Commune everywhere? Is there no connection to what we claim as the “Deposit of Faith” that we accept from and the Eucharist we accept?

I have a profound sense of Communion as encompassing more that the basic milk of initiation, but of “… the whole treasure of wisdom and understanding” which was “…made manifold through the Church”

Both the simple and uneducated and the learned and wise can find nourishment here.

 

[rcwitness]

But He said bread and wine which we both use?

Remember, a big difference with this command of Jesus from other analogies made by Him; all the others He said “I am ____” but with His Eucharist, He said, “This is my body”

We believe there is a profound difference. When He said, “I am the branch” we know it’s figuratively only. When He says, “This is my body” We (with the help of Sacred Tradition) understand it to mean something mysteriously profound.

 

[Wannano]

Remember, a big difference with this command of Jesus from other analogies made by Him; all the others He said “I am ____” but with His Eucharist, He said, “This is my body”

We believe there is a profound difference. When He said, “I am the branch” we know it’s figuratively only. When He says, “This is my body” We (with the help of Sacred Tradition) understand it to mean something mysteriously profound.

Not arguing, but He did say “I am the Bread.”

 

[rcwitness]

Not arguing, but He did say “I am the Bread.”

Yes, I believe He was bringing together the reality of His Spiritual nourishment with the flesh and blood that would become the necessary means of us being able to receive the Spirit. I keep driving this point; His body and blood were sealed by the Father as having its beginning and end in the Spirit. It’s too much to understand, but we can know Him, so we can have “some” understanding of the mystery.

Also, He said the Eagles would gather where the body is. There is the sign of the unifying purpose and effect of His Eucharist. His Eucharist is not harmed by division, but hurt. The symbolic view of Communion has produced hundreds, if not thousands of divisions. It becomes a matter of… oh, I don’t need to agree with them, I can start a church that suits our needs and does not have to face their music. Let them be hurting and struggling, we should not partake of that suffering.

This is the American way. It’s not the Eucharist way.

 

[Wannano]

Yes, I believe He was bringing together the reality of His Spiritual nourishment with the flesh and blood that would become the necessary means of us being able to receive the Spirit. I keep driving this point; His body and blood were sealed by the Father as having its beginning and end in the Spirit. It’s too much to understand, but we can know Him, so we can have “some” understanding of the mystery.

Also, He said the Eagles would gather where the body is. There is the sign of the unifying purpose and effect of His Eucharist. His Eucharist is not harmed by division, but hurt. The symbolic view of Communion has produced hundreds, if not thousands of divisions. It becomes a matter of… oh, I don’t need to agree with them, I can start a church that suits our needs and does not have to face their music. Let them be hurting and struggling, we should not partake of that suffering.

This is the American way. It’s not the Eucharist way.

It is a new thought to me that symbolic view of communion is the cause of division of the Protestant churches. I have to process that.

 

[rcwitness]

It is a new thought to me that symbolic view of communion is the cause of division of the Protestant churches. I have to process that.

maybe I shouldn’t say it’s not so much the cause, but the outcome. It becomes the necessary profession of those who divide from the body.

You said it is a personal thing. But it is both personal and corporal by nature. It involves love of God AND neighbor. Sometimes that means suffering the wickedness from among our members, and sometimes it mean recourse through our members.

 

[carefullytread]

So, I may not be the most versed and knowledgeable in apologetics but I know a good deal about Catholicism. I see posts that deal with what non-Catholics find objectionable about Catholic belief and practices. This, to me, really does not get to the root of the issue, but rather is just personal opinion, personal feelings, and personal interpretations of sacred scripture, not facts.

As a convert I know what most of them are so I guess my question would really be what are the Catholic beliefs and practices that a non-Catholic can cite as being inherently sinful, malevolent, or malicious in nature? References please.

I am not trying to start a “Negative” thread, but wanting to get some insight.

I think the deontological nature of Catholic ethics can lead it to make some “sinful, malevolent, or malicious” requirements of its followers.

Some examples. The absolute ban on birth control and abortion. I used to not understand this at all, but as I’ve learned more about the Church’s teachings, I’ve come to see a lot of wisdom here where I before I just saw anachronism. But, again, the absolutist position can cause terrible situations.

For couples where pregnancy risks death, the solutions are total abstinence for the rest of their lives or very rigorous NFP hoping for the best and accepting death otherwise. For some saintly people, maybe that brings them closer to God, but I see a more likely outcome being an unnecessary death of marital intimacy.

Or when you read about Catholic hospitals that tell women who are miscarrying that they must wait until their unborn babies are already dead or they have serious sepsis before they can be operated on.

And those are just the first world problems.

I’ve spent a lot of time in rural Latin America where the poor women are trapped in a world of having too many children they can scarcely feed. To tell them to practice NFP is to completely misunderstand a culture where a woman could not ask that of her husband. In the first world, Catholics just ignore their bishops, but these poor women live lives where they are powerless. The first time your hear one of these women say that it is too late for her, that she just wishes her daughters didn’t have to have a child every two years you can’t help but feel a deep, deep shame for how easy your own life is.

Or watch some of your loved ones suffer through months of pointless agony at the end of their lives, where they are barely conscious of anything but pain and it’s hard to not see sin in denying them peace.

Again, not to pick arguments. I know the Catholic positions and I’m not trying to convince anyone that they are wrong, just telling you some places where I see Catholic teachings not only being wrong, but causing evil. And of course I know my definition of evil and yours are very different

 

[Wannano]

Yes, I believe He was bringing together the reality of His Spiritual nourishment with the flesh and blood that would become the necessary means of us being able to receive the Spirit. I keep driving this point; His body and blood were sealed by the Father as having its beginning and end in the Spirit. It’s too much to understand, but we can know Him, so we can have “some” understanding of the mystery.

Also, He said the Eagles would gather where the body is. There is the sign of the unifying purpose and effect of His Eucharist. His Eucharist is not harmed by division, but hurt. The symbolic view of Communion has produced hundreds, if not thousands of divisions. It becomes a matter of… oh, I don’t need to agree with them, I can start a church that suits our needs and does not have to face their music. Let them be hurting and struggling, we should not partake of that suffering.

This is the American way. It’s not the Eucharist way.

Could you direct me to scriptures that back up the idea that in order to receive the Holy Spirit Jesus says we must see His Eucharist as the spiritual nourishment necessary to receive the Holy Spirit?

 

[rcwitness]

Could you direct me to scriptures that back up the idea that in order to receive the Holy Spirit Jesus says we must see His Eucharist as the spiritual nourishment necessary to receive the Holy Spirit?

John 6
"I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

… The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"*So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you;*he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.

Matt. 26
Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.”**And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “**Drink of it, all of you;for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.*I tell you I shall not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

 

[Wannano]

John 6
"I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

… The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"*So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you;*he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.

Matt. 26
Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.”**And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “**Drink of it, all of you;for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.*I tell you I shall not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

Thanks rc, now I ask you to expound on these particular verses to show me where any of them indicates the Holy Spirit is available to me only if I subscribe to transubstantiation.

 

[rcwitness]

Thanks rc, now I ask you to expound on these particular verses to show me where any of them indicates the Holy Spirit is available to me only if I subscribe to transubstantiation.

No. That’s not accurately seeing what I’m saying.

Jesus died in the flesh to bring the Spirit to abide with man. The Sacrament is the Participation (in faith and obedience) in the sacrifice which established this Covenant.

You are challenging this Covenant because of the Protestant break from this Body and Blood! The Catechism deals with this complicated situation. Remember my explanation which you liked and copied? It touched on that aspect.

But Jesus did die, so that we could have life. We only have life by accepting His Spirit. As individuals, we receive the Spirit first. We are washed and given the Spirit, and then Confirmed as endowed with the Spirit, fully. We then partake of the Blessed meal which brought us the Spirit… His Body and Blood.

 

[Wannano]

No. That’s not accurately seeing what I’m saying.

Jesus died in the flesh to bring the Spirit to abide with man. The Sacrament is the Participation (in faith and obedience) in the sacrifice which established this Covenant.

You are challenging this Covenant because of the Protestant break from this Body and Blood! The Catechism deals with this complicated situation. Remember my explanation which you liked and copied? It touched on that aspect.

But Jesus did die, so that we could have life. We only have life by accepting His Spirit. As individuals, we receive the Spirit first. We are washed and given the Spirit, and then Confirmed as endowed with the Spirit, fully. We then partake of the Blessed meal which brought us the Spirit… His Body and Blood.

I had misunderstood you.