SPLIT: The Eucharist in Scripture and Catholic teaching.

[Cal_Fullerton]

Yes, of course, this is also true —that eating and drinking Jesus is a moment-by-moment activity not limited to the Communion ritual]. But there is a special sense in which He is present to us during the Lord’s Supper that sets it apart. It also sustains us, so that this daily living in Him is possible.

I have come to understand that “there is a special sense in which He is present to [you] during the Lord’s Supper,” as you said. I have this forum to thank. It seems clear that this special sense is not so often experienced among non-Catholics.

I’m glad we agree that eating Jesus is not limited to Communion. :yup: This is monumental.

I realize I am late to the thread, but I wanted to jump in here to commend you on this attitude. I think it is great that you are open minded, willing to explore various perspectives, and willing to be convinced.

Thank-you. I’ll give all credit for that to that Amazing God above.

God bless you back.

 

[Cal_Fullerton]

If there is a Catholic who believes that “participating in Communion was enough”, sadly, he is mistaken, and has been poorly catechized, Cal. For the Church, while she does proclaim that the Eucharist is the source and summit of our faith, has never ever maintained that participating in Communion is “enough”.

Fantastic!

 

[PRmerger]

Fantastic!

Just curious, Cal, why you think this is “fantastic”. Did someone once tell you that Catholics just need to take communion and they are destined for heaven?

 

[Cal_Fullerton]

Those who go to Purgatory are already on their way to Heaven - there are no “second chances” in Purgatory for those who are in the state of mortal sin. If a person dies in the state of mortal sin, he goes straight to Hell; there is no stop-over in Purgatory.

I see! That’s not a whole lot different than Protestantism.

 

[Cal_Fullerton]

As a charismatic Catholic, and having fooled around with the occult before coming to faith, I have had some experience with the denizens of hell. Just that small peek was more than enough to convince me I did not want to make a closer acquaintance.

You have a fascinating history. I’d love to hear a more detailed version.

You are charismatic? So am I! Do you speak in tongues? Does your local congregation have charismatic (or contemporary) praise & worship with simple praise songs designed to attract God’s presence and sung back to back to allow for a more efficient attraction of the presence of God?

Jesus said that if we don’t eat His Body and drink His Blood, we will have no life within us.

Ah, back to the infamous—or famous—John 6:53.
If any of you want to delve deeper into it, you might use the context of the verse to show me why you think the Protestant view cannot be true. Demonstrate to me that you’ve done some independent thinking—not independent of God but independent of Church leaders.
I don’t think you’re totally incapable of understanding the Bible with your own illuminated mind. I hope you aren’t letting the Church lead you to believe you have more handicaps than you do.

 

[Cal_Fullerton]

I’m all caught up. Yea!!
Please excuse me if in the future I give up trying to keep up with y’all. Seven to fifteen Catholics can be too much for one to three Protestants!

Have any of you ever read He and I by Gabrielle Bossis? She was a French woman, and apparently Catholic. The book is a diary of what she heard the Lord speak to her. It’s one of my most beloved books.

Merry Christmas to all. And thanks again.
God loves you very much.

 

[PRmerger]

If any of you want to delve deeper into it, you might use the context of the verse to show me why you think the Protestant view cannot be true.

Because the Protestant understanding, that Jesus only meant it metaphorically, does not make sense for the disciples to say, “This saying is hard. Who can accept it?”

Rather, the Protestant understanding is that which, if we want to make it an easy saying, we would proclaim. It’s Jesus’ words edited to make it more acceptable.

Demonstrate to me that you’ve done some independent thinking—not independent of God but independent of Church leaders.

This is a false dichotomy, Cal. It’s these Church leaders that gave you the Bible, so how independent can they be from God?

 

[PRmerger]

I’m all caught up. Yea!!
Please excuse me if in the future I give up trying to keep up with y’all. Seven to fifteen Catholics can be too much for one to three Protestants!

Have any of you ever read He and I by Gabrielle Bossis? She was a French woman, and apparently Catholic. The book is a diary of what she heard the Lord speak to her. It’s one of my most beloved books.

Merry Christmas to all. And thanks again.
God loves you very much.

Not quite, friend.

Please respond to this one:

Just curious, Cal, why you think this is “fantastic”. Did someone once tell you that Catholics just need to take communion and they are destined for heaven?

And, yes, you deserve kudos for being the lone voice here on the thread in response to 7-15 Catholics!

 

[adrift]

As far as I know, communion and baptism are the only rites Jesus instituted for the new covenant church, so the purpose of communion must be vitally important.
.

I didn’t read this thread carefully so I might have missed this being addressed. If so, I am sorry.

Church Militant has a blog that covers this quite well.
“I Find no Sacarments in the Bible” he said.
Jesus established 7
Baptism
Eucharist
Confirmation

Penance
Sacrament of the Sick

Holy Orders
Matrimony

 

[CMatt25]

Because the Protestant understanding, that Jesus only meant it metaphorically, does not make sense for the disciples to say, “This saying is hard. Who can accept it?”

It can make sense PR if someone believes those disciples who said it was a hard saying, thought it was hard because they were misunderstanding what Jesus was talkng about. If for instance He was talking metaphorically or about His presence in spirit giving life. But if they were still hung up on the literal.

 

[adrift]

It can make sense PR if someone believes those disciples who said it was a hard saying, thought it was hard because they were misunderstanding what Jesus was talkng about. If for instance He was talking metaphorically or about His presence in spirit giving life. But if they were still hung up on the literal.

It makes even less sense for Jesus not to correct a misunderstanding. They walked away and Jesus wouldn’t correct it. When Nicodemus misunderstood Jesus corrected it. PR is right.

 

[CMatt25]

It makes even less sense for Jesus not to correct a misunderstanding. They walked away and Jesus wouldn’t correct it. When Nicodemus misunderstood Jesus corrected it. PR is right.

Unless someone is of the belief that Jesus had already corrected/explained it in His discourse and those that walked away still were not understanding. So He had no choice but to finally let them walk if they still weren’t getting it.

 

[PRmerger]

It can make sense PR if someone believes those disciples who said it was a hard saying, thought it was hard because they were misunderstanding what Jesus was talkng about. If for instance He was talking metaphorically or about His presence in spirit giving life. But if they were still hung up on the literal.

Not following you, Matt. What’s a “hard saying” about a Jesus being present metaphorically or spiritually? The disciples were Jews who understood the concept of the numinous. So Jesus saying his presence in the spirit gives life would have been perfectly easy to embrace.

Why walk away from that?

 

[PRmerger]

It makes even less sense for Jesus not to correct a misunderstanding. They walked away and Jesus wouldn’t correct it. When Nicodemus misunderstood Jesus corrected it. PR is right.

My 3 favorite words.

 

[adrift]

Unless someone is of the belief that Jesus had already corrected/explained it in His discourse and those that walked away still were not understanding. So He had no choice but to finally let them walk if they still weren’t getting it.

And no one recorded this explanation or correction? They just record that they walked away.
When there was a misunderstanding Jesus is recorded in correcting it. Even if they wouldn’t get His explanation at the very least it would be recorded. Instead, we have them walking away because they DID understand correctly.

What’s a “hard saying” about a Jesus being present metaphorically or spiritually?

Why walk away from that?

Again Pr’s favorite words, she is right!

 

[CMatt25]

Not following you, Matt. What’s a “hard saying” about a Jesus being present metaphorically or spiritually? The disciples were Jews who understood the concept of the numinous. So Jesus saying his presence in the spirit gives life would have been perfectly easy to embrace.

Why walk away from that?

The hard saying would have been if He was figuratively saying to eat His flesh and drink His blood but if they took it literally. If instead He meant to believe (eat) that He would be giving up His flesh and blood for our eternal life.

Jn 6:35 And Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall not hunger: and he that believeth in me shall never thirst.

Jn 6:40 And this is the will of my Father that sent me: that every one who seeth the Son, and believeth in him, may have life everlasting, and I will raise him up in the last day."

 

[CMatt25]

And no one recorded this explanation or correction? They just record that they walked away.
When there was a misunderstanding Jesus is recorded in correcting it. Even if they wouldn’t get His explanation at the very least it would be recorded. Instead, we have them walking away because they DID understand correctly.

See the verses I quoted for PR and others recorded where it could be said Jesus did explain that what He was talking about when He spoke of eating His flesh was believing in Him and how He came down from heaven and believing after giving up His flesh for us, He would be ascending up to where He was before. And after the disciples still complained about the hard saying, Jesus then even spoke of spirit and life. So some might believe it was because they were still taking things literally even after all of this explaining in regards to believing and spirit and life, that they walked.

 

[adrift]

See the verses I quoted for PR and others recorded where it could be said Jesus did explain that what He was talking about was believing in Him and how He came down from heaven and would be ascending up to where He was before. And after the disciples complained about the hard saying, Jesus then spoke of spirit and life. So some might say it was because they were still taking things literally even after all of this explaining in regards to believing and spirit and life, that they walked.

Doesn’t wash. Why? When Nichodemus misunderstood, we don’t find the explantion provided elsewhere. Jesus provides it right away. He says nothing to those who walk away. Because they understood correctly as we see later when Jesus says “This is My Body. This is My Blood”

 

[CMatt25]

Doesn’t wash. Why? When Nichodemus misunderstood, we don’t find the explantion provided elsewhere. Jesus provides it right away. He says nothing to those who walk away. Because they understood correctly as we see later when Jesus says “This is My Body. This is My Blood”

Some might believe He did provide it right away. Everything I mentioned is found in the same chapter.

Jn 6:61 Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard, and who can hear it?

63 If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?

64 It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.

65 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning, who they were that did not believe, and who he was, that would betray him.

And those that did not walk had this to say:

69 And Simon Peter answered him: Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. 70And we have believed and have known, that thou art the Christ, the Son of God.

I fully understand what I presented is converse to the Catholic belief. I’m just trying to explain since PR said it didn’t make sense, how it could make sense depending on one’s faith beliefs is all.

 

[adrift]

Some might believe He did provide it right away. Everything I mentioned is found in the same chapter.

.

Those who were listening to Jesus did not read the chapter. The explanation that you seem to think is there is not presented to them. Jesus according to you allowed them to walk away with a misunderstanding. That doesn’t make sense.