K
kms123
Guest
Non-catholic christians, what does this mean?
- Status
K
Keikiolu
Guest
(( I’m not a non-Catholic. ))
It means an actual piece of Jesus’ body,… which might be difficult to find on EBay.
Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaika
i ia oe. Aloha nui.
C
ChadS
Guest
A few years ago, before I became Catholic I would’ve said it didn’t exist. The concept arose from a seriously distorted understanding of John and seemed to have more to do with superstition and fantasy than a feasible, rational understanding of faith. I would’ve also said God doesn’t do stuff like that – not that he couldn’t, just that he wouldn’t.
Of course that’s how I would’ve answered before I came to see and understand the truth in all its wonderful brillance.
ChadS
Of course that’s how I would’ve answered before I came to see and understand the truth in all its wonderful brillance.
ChadS
K
kms123
Guest
The term is used by non-catholic christians. I did not know this. I just read it. I am looking for their definition and maybe a little history lesson with it.
Thanks.
J
JimG
Guest
If you are referring to Jesus’ real presence in the Eucharist, it means the entirety of Jesus’ body (as well as his soul and divinity). Jesus is not divided into pieces.
N
Nella
Guest
The body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. The same exact thing that we believe.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
No offense but for me this means that catholicism is deep into delusions. Eucharist is just make believe for it really does nothing but make a person feel good from 5 minutes to 1 hour. THATS IT! No physical benefits, no permanent mental/psychological benefits, and the spiritual benefits…does it guarantee anything? Does it make catholics holier than the rest of us? You eat the supreme being and what do you really get?
P
Peregrino
Guest
lol! Others will be offended but I find your irreverance humorous. Catholics will say you get eternal life as your reward for consuming the supreme being pursuant to their interp of John 6.
Does this make us more holy or guarantee anything? Good questions. This interp does rather reinforce the monopolization of
the Eucharist via the “necessity” of apostolic succession by the church. The reasoning follows that one needs the church in order to get the “real” eucharist in order to get eternal life.
I don’t believe that even a placebo effect is a negative thing since that is what you believe it to be.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
I’d like to see catholics justify that through the cathechism.
placebo is a good thing. hey as long as it works for you, whether real or imagined, so long as its harmless its ok!
P
Peregrino
Guest
Actually, there is the small matter of sin at death that probably factors in for Catholics. I have probably misspoke and should leave making statements about the “true catholic” faith to the Catholics that are concerned with legalities and accurately representing the party line. I am sure someone will arrive shortly and vilify me…lol
I’d like to see catholics justify that through the cathechism.
I agree 100%. If we all followed whatever belief system we choose with the attitude that it is ok as long it doesn’t hurt others, the world would be a better place.placebo is a good thing. hey as long as it works for you, whether real or imagined, so long as its harmless its ok!
B
bpbasilphx
Guest
<<It means an actual piece of Jesus’ body,… which might be difficult to find on EBay.>>
**
** W * R * O * N * G * !!!*
The ENTIRE Christ is present in the Eucharist.**
**
** W * R * O * N * G * !!!*
The ENTIRE Christ is present in the Eucharist.**
K
kms123
Guest
I am not sure who we represents in your answer. I am new and do not see your affiliation. Everyone is referring to catholic this and that. I wanted to know how non-catholic christians use the term. Maybe they don’t. I just found an article interesting. I will share the link.
The non-catholic christians think this term is the same as we use it. So became the Catholic use of transubstantiation.
catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9812fea3.asp
D
Delraek
Guest
I’ve never experienced this “feel good” concept that you’re referring to! Faith is more than “feelings” - unfortunately, many people don’t understand that. I think that’s why so many people get divorced - don’t get those “feelings” any more. Commitment is intellectual - our emotions can change like the direction of the wind. If we could experience true “happiness” here on earth all the time, why would we need heaven?
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
so what do you get from eating God almighty?
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
thank you. now lets see whats it got to say:
Cathechism 1391:
And what do you get out of this ‘augmented union’? Whats the difference between a righteous catholic who ate jesus and a righteous catholic who was sick and missed eating jesus that same sunday?
Cathechism 1392:
material food feeds the body, allowing a healthy body to function at full efficiency, and the sick body to recuperate.
Is that what holy communion does to spiritual life? Then that should mean that catholics are more spiritual than the rest of humanity. But they are not. Catholics are just like everyone else in terms of spiritual life.
Cathechism:
preserving from future sins? are there less catholics in jail compared to other people? are catholics less likely to tell a lie? are catholics less likely to violate the law? do catholics have a cleaner historical record? …far from it.
Cathechism 1395:
on the contrary it seems like there is a higher rate of rape cases among catholic clergy than everyone else.
Cathechism 1396:
yeah that feel good effect.
Cathechism 1397:
any evidence that catholics care for the poor more than other people?
Cathechism 1398:
the rcc & the eastern orthodox churches both eat jesus. now where is the unity? Martin luther was a jesus eater. what happened?
Cathechism 1399:
the cathechism just contradicted itself (1398 vs 1399).
What catholics really get from the Eucharist:
- Feel good effect.
- Promises
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
And there is really no practical difference from Evangelical Communions. Makes them feel good, and makes them closer to Jesus. 
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
I try not to go into gigantic point-for-point discussions, so if there’s something you said you specifically want me to address, let me know. I prefer one point at a time. And the forum rules suggest shorter posts.
But per above. What makes you think that Catholics who receive Communion regularly and in proper conscience are just as likely to go to jail as anyone? I would think those people are far less likely.
All the Catholics I can think of who receive Christ regularly and properly throughout history are far less likely to commit crimes from what I see. Aquinas, Augustine, Padre Pio, Mother Teresa, people I know, etc…
- Status