SPLIT: The Eucharist in Scripture and Catholic teaching.

[adrift]

Hi, adrift.
You are right, I didn’t mean to be insulting. How would you suggest I refer to the body and blood of the Lord in the Eucharist when I don’t want to be deceitful and lead someone to believe that I believe it is the blood and body of the Lord when I only believe they represent the body and blood of the Lord? Could I call them the accidents without being insulting?

I have been using the word to mean the whole ritual, including the priest’s consecration of the bread and wine, and his giving to each person some bread and his giving to each person a taste of the wine.

Maybe I should put on a thicker skin. I don’t think you were insulting. It just hit me wrong. You might have said I have been using the word to mean the whole ritual, including the priest’s consecration of the bread and wine, and his giving to each person some of the consecrated bread and wine.
I agree that you do not want to leave the wrong impression. Saying the accidents wouldn’t be insulting. I appreciate your kind response.

When you say the body of the resurrected, Glorified Jesus, do you mean the body of Jesus that Thomas touched?

Yes the Body that went through a locked door.

I can assure you that I’m not an agnostic! You almost insulted me! I say “almost” because I realize interdenominational communication can be difficult and so I put my thick skin on!

I did not mean to insult you. I didn’t mean agnostic but gnostic. And only in the sense that there was secrect knowledge revealed to the elect. That is what struck me and I do not intend or mean to insult you. I am sorry

Do you have a personal relationship with Jesus, adrift? Is He living in your heart because you have made Him your Lord?

It is this and more. I don’t make Jesus Lord, He is Lord.
Definition Lord = God.

God bless you. Have a nice day!

You too
God Bless You.

 

[Cal_Fullerton]

I happened upon something in a book I’m reading that makes me think of something jmcrea said. jm said something about ignoring emotions for the sake of finding the right doctrine. Bill Johnson, in When Heaven Invades Earth, p. 111, says,

"Some, because of their fear of error, have said it’s improper to seek for an experience with God. After all, many deceived groups have come from those who based their beliefs on experiences in conflict with Scripture. . . . But why aren’t those same individuals afraid of belonging to the doctrinally stable camps that are powerless? Is this deception any less dangerous than that of the power abuser?

The point I get out of that quote is that if your doctrine doesn’t bring power from God, if it isn’t life-changing, isn’t that equally a sign that you’re under some deception?

 

[jmcrae]

Thanks for your contribution, SWR11.
I don’t know what you mean by “the Ante-Nicene Church.” Is that equivalent to the Protestant church?

No. “Ante” means “before” (thus, “anteroom” meaning the foyer, or the space before the main living room) - the Ante-Nicene Church is the Catholic Church prior to the Council of Nicea. The Ante-Nicene Fathers are St. Polycarp, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Justin Martyr, etc., all of whom affirmed the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and the authority of the Bishops in union with Peter and his successors.

 

[jmcrae]

Maybe I’ve been misusing the word Eucharist. Are you saying the Eucharist is the bread and the wine? I have been using the word to mean the whole ritual, including the priest’s consecration of the bread and wine, and his giving to each person some bread and his giving to each person a taste of the wine.

If Eucharist is a word for the bread and wine after they become the body and blood of Christ, what word do you use to describe the whole ritual?

That’s the Mass.

To explain my differentiation between the body of Christ and the Holy Spirit, who is Christ, let me use 2 Corinthians 3:17. (Keep in mind, I’m not talking about the Eucharist now.) It says (in the NAB version), “The Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.”

That verse (2 Cor. 3:17) shows that when Scripture refers to the Lord or to Christ, it very often is referring to the Spirit, that is, the Spirit that lives in the hearts of every follower of Jesus, and the Spirit that causes us to experience freedom—from depression, discouragement, jealousy, envy, anger, lust, and all other kinds of sin.

When I referred to the body of Christ, I meant the resurrected body that doubting Thomas touched and that has scars on it from the crucifixion. (I do realize that the phase “body of Christ” doesn’t always refer in Scripture to Jesus’ tangible, resurrected body.)

The body and the spirit are inseparable. You cannot have Jesus’ spirit without His body, any more than you could have your own spirit without your body. Without the spirit, the body is dead, but we know that Christ is alive, being risen from the dead.

 

[jmcrae]

How can you say it’s awesome when you don’t feel anything? I’m trying to be as respectful as I know how, but it sounds like you are imagining something that’s not real.

No more than I am imagining my bank balance when I do my monthly bills. I can feel awful, I can feel great, or I can feel nothing at all, but my feelings have no effect on the reality of my bank balance.

Jesus in the Eucharist is as real as that - or even more so, since my bank balance changes according to how much I work and how much I spend, but Jesus is constant - and how I feel has nothing to do with His reality. It’s awesome to think about, because it doesn’t depend on me - it’s way bigger than I am, and something I am part of, simply by being present and receiving Him into my body.

 

[jmcrae]

Do you believe it is possible for someone who has known the Lord to turn completely back to the devil, lose all faith, and end up in hell? As you probably know, some Christians believe once saved, always saved. (Incidentally, they’re using the word saved to mean justification. Catholics don’t usually use the word “saved” for that, do they?)

I think that even if you end up in Hell, you will always have that blood kin relationship with Jesus. It will be a torment to you if you reject Him and end up in Hell, but it will be a joy to you if you persevere in holiness of life, and end up in Heaven.

 

[jmcrae]

I happened upon something in a book I’m reading that makes me think of something jmcrea said. jm said something about ignoring emotions for the sake of finding the right doctrine. Bill Johnson, in When Heaven Invades Earth, p. 111, says,

The point I get out of that quote is that if your doctrine doesn’t bring power from God, if it isn’t life-changing, isn’t that equally a sign that you’re under some deception?

My experience of Jesus in the Eucharist is definitely life-changing.

I don’t understand why you believe or assume that one has to have a weepy hysterical emotional reaction, in order for it to be life-changing experience.

 

[Linda_Marie]

How can you say it’s awesome when you don’t feel anything? I’m trying to be as respectful as I know how, but it sounds like you are imagining something that’s not real.

Jesus is always with me in spirit even though I have never eaten the consecrated bread or drunk the wine of Catholic Eucharist—I take that back—there have been times I have visited a Catholic church and partaken of the bread and wine, but that’s not how I received His eternal life. I received His eternal life the moment I surrendered my life to Him.

Sometimes Protestants actually have a vision of Jesus or see him in a completely real way. Often these are very dramatic events.

I had a vision of Jesus once but He was vague, not exactly his real size, and the vision was not earth-shattering to me. I’d say more but . . .

I’m tired. I must retire.

Take care, my buddy.

I will answer more fully later. I haven’t been well lately and my mind is not functioning clearly.

I pray that that you may be transformed by having received His Glorified Body and come to know the Truth - that you have received God’s Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity. I believe that your being here on this forum, asking these questions, is born of having received Him, that the Eucharist has awakened this quest within you.

May God bless you and bring you to the fullness of Truth.

 

[adrift]

My experience of Jesus in the Eucharist is definitely life-changing.

I don’t understand why you believe or assume that one has to have a weepy hysterical emotional reaction, in order for it to be life-changing experience.

Exactly!

 

[Cal_Fullerton]

I want to wish a happy Mother’s Day to all the special mothers of this forum.

To those who have written to me: It may be a week or longer before I respond to your comments. I hope you’ll be patient. One Protestant has a hard time keeping up with 5+ Catholics!

God bless you all. Keep shining your light! We’re one in our Lord Jesus.

 

[PRmerger]

How can you say it’s awesome when you don’t feel anything? I’m trying to be as respectful as I know how, but it sounds like you are imagining something that’s not real.

Hiya, Cal!

If you’re a married man you might understand this analogy. Perhaps your marriage is “awesome” (and I hope it is!). But I’m quite certain that you don’t feel that way every single moment you look at your wife.

In my case, my marriage is indeed awesome. But sometimes when I go downstairs in the morning and I see my husband reading the paper, the first thought I have isn’t, “Oh my GOODNESS! Being married to him is the most AWESOME thing in the world!” it’s more like, “Where’s the coffee??”

That feeling (or lack thereof) that is attached to the moment does not diminish the fact that it is indeed an AWESOME sacrament we have.

Feelings do not a sacrament make.

 

[PRmerger]

Jesus is always with me in spirit even though I have never eaten the consecrated bread or drunk the wine of Catholic Eucharist—I take that back—

This is indeed wonderful.

Going with the analogy I provided earlier…my husband is always with me in spirit. But I would never replace this with actually being physically present with him.

That’s what Catholics have. We have Jesus, like you do, “always with us in spirit”, but also physically present, body, blood, soul and divinity.

And who wouldn’t rather have your Beloved present with you physically, rather than just spiritually?

there have been times I have visited a Catholic church and partaken of the bread and wine, but that’s not how I received His eternal life. I received His eternal life the moment I surrendered my life to Him.

Cal, I must caution you: DO NOT DO THIS. You may not “partake” of the “bread and wine” in a Catholic Mass. That is a lie and may have grave consequences for you.

When you come and receive communion you are speaking with your body that you are in UNION with the Catholic Church. You are stating that you believe all that Christ and His Church has proclaimed in the Catholic Church.

And at this point, that is not true. Thus, what you speak with your actions in receiving the Eucharist is at great conflict with what you profess here.

I repeat, Cal, you cannot and ought not and should not “partake” of the Eucharist at the Catholic Mass.

 

[SWR11]

Thanks for your contribution, SWR11.
I don’t know what you mean by “the Ante-Nicene Church.” Is that equivalent to the Protestant church?

Hi Carl,
Sorry for the delay in responding, I just noticed your question this morning. The Ante-Nicene Chruch refers to the writings of the early church fathers (ECF’s) prior to the council of Nicea, approx. 325. Some would argue that they are more closely related to Protestants because of their divergent views on different topics and doctrines. Even Pope Benedict in one of his books has stated that the ECF’s are not Roman Catholic or Protestant, but Catholic, ie univiersal, believers in Christ.

When I have looked into the Ante-Nicene ECF’s I have not found unequivocal teachings about many Roman Catholic beliefs such as the papacy, priesthood, Mass as propitiatory, Marian dogma’s, the Real Presence as the physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist. As time went on, especially after Constantine declared Christianity the religion of the empire, things began to develop quickly. Shortly after Nicea, the Mass began to take on the propitiatory nature in some parts of the Chruch, and not others. The Priesthood as a distinct office and function from the the priesthood of believers began to develop, especially w/Cyprian. These are just a few examples.

If you have any more questions I will try my best to answer. Blessings

 

[hawkeye125646]

1st sign The New Passover for a new Exodus

There were a several plagues. The greatest plague was the Passover, which saved the Jewish nation… correlation of the First born Son to be put to death, unless the will of God was fulfilled.

Read Exodus 12:3-11 The Fathers were all priests. They were allowed to perform the sacrifice of the Lamb! That was the Passover lamb of the ritual. At the time of Jesus Christ, on Passover night, the child would ask “Why is this night different than any other night? The Father would quote Exodus 13:8 And thou shalt shew thy son in that day, saying, [This is done] because of that [which] the LORD did unto me when I came forth out of Egypt. Through the sacrifice of the lamb, the ritual (in perpetual ordinance!) they were brought back to Egypt, at the time of the deliverance. So, the Passover was a perpetual ordinance, of the first Passover. Read the Mishnah!

This is the new covenant: Important similarities and differences:

The New Passover was at the Last Supper. If there was a new Exodus, there would need to be a new Passover. Jesus established the New Covenant before he was to be crucified. The differences between the Last Supper and the Passover was

1. No Levitical priests
2. No Lamb.

At the first Passover all Fathers were priests. They were able to offer the sacrifice of the Passover. Exodus 32:26 Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who [is] on the LORD’S side? [let him come] unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. 27 And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, [and] go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.

As such, only the Levites were allowed to Sacrifice the Lamb, of the Passover.

Read Mark 14:12-24 This is not the ordinary Passover. The Perpetual ordinance, of the Old Testament! (Malachi 1:11 For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name [shall be] great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense [shall be] offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name [shall be] great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts.)

Leviticus 19:22 And the priest shall make atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering before the LORD for his sin which he hath done: and the sin which he hath done shall be forgiven him.

Jesus chose 12 Apostles (To represent the 12 tribes of Israel!) to be the priests of the new Covenant. They will still remember, the First Passover, through a better fulfillment of the New Covenant! If it was a symbolic, it would not be a better. In the old covenant you HAD to EAT the lamb. In the new Covenant you had to eat Jesus’ body!

Old sacrifice was the lamb. The new sacrifice of the bread and wine was the new sacrifice!

Isaiah 52:10 The Lord hath prepared his holy arm in the sight of all the Gentiles: and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God.

Luke 2:25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him. 26And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.

Every Jew understood that, the perpetual ordinance from Egypt! As such, you had to eat the Passover! It is the same in the New Passover! Every Christian knew that!

1 Cor 5 7 Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened. For Christ our pasch is sacrificed. 8Therefore let us feast, not with the old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

 

[hawkeye125646]

2 Old testament image… the manna from Heaven!

In Exodus 15, when god saved the Jews from the Egyptian armies, they started to complain…. They wanted to go back to Egypt. They wanted to have something to eat. Exodus 16:3 And the children of Israel said to them: Would to God we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat over the flesh pots, and ate bread to the full. Why have you brought us into this desert, that you might destroy all the multitude with famine? They wanted to go back to leading sinful lives. So, the Lord said:

Read Exodus 16:4-15 Take a look at Verse 8. In the evening there was flesh, which the Lord will give you! What was the manna?

Exodus 16:30 And the people kept the Sabbath on the seventh day. 31And the house of Israel called the name thereof Manna: and it was like coriander seed white, and the taste thereof like to flour with honey. This was a foretaste of the Promised Land, filled with milk and honey! This is the bread that came down from heaven. Jesus is the bread of life!

Exodus 16:33 And Moses said to Aaron: Take a vessel, and put manna into it, as much as a gomor can hold: and lay it up before the Lord to keep unto your generations, 34 As the Lord commanded Moses. And Aaron put it in the tabernacle to be kept. So, they were putting the manna, Put it in the golden Urn, and place it in the heart of the tabernacle, inside the Ark of the Covenant

Read Hebrews 9:1-4 Every Jew, at the time would recognize this! Completely! Jesus speaks about this in Matthew 6:9 Thus therefore shall you pray: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. 10Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.11Give us this day our supersubstantial bread. 12And forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors. 13And lead us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil. Amen.

 Read And John 6:34-72 Dissertation of the Eucharist!

The Our Father Prayer:

The original wording is Give us this day our supersubstantial bread. This is the actual translation from the Greek Septuagint language! This is alluding to the manna of the old testament The Manna was not ordinary bread.

We are praying for the Supernatural bread that came down from heaven, which is consumed at the Eucharist! We are praying for the Manna of the new Covenant! The Old Testament manna was DAILY and SUPERNATURAL, so to the EUCHARIST is DAILY and SUPERNATURAL. Read the Catechism 2837

Daily" (epiousios) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. Taken in a temporal sense, this word is a pedagogical repetition of "this day,"128 to confirm us in trust “without reservation.” Taken in the qualitative sense, it signifies what is necessary for life, and more broadly every good thing sufficient for subsistence.129 Taken literally (epi-ousios: “super-essential”), it refers directly to the Bread of Life, the Body of Christ, the “medicine of immortality,” without which we have no life within us.130 Finally in this connection, its heavenly meaning is evident: “this day” is the Day of the Lord, the day of the feast of the kingdom, anticipated in the Eucharist that is already the foretaste of the kingdom to come. For this reason it is fitting for the Eucharistic liturgy to be celebrated each day.

The Eucharist is our daily bread. The power belonging to this divine food makes it a bond of union. Its effect is then understood as unity, so that, gathered into his Body and made members of him, we may become what we receive. . . . This also is our daily bread: the readings you hear each day in church and the hymns you hear and sing. All these are necessities for our pilgrimage.131

The Father in heaven urges us, as children of heaven, to ask for the bread of heaven. [Christ] himself is the bread who, sown in the Virgin, raised up in the flesh, kneaded in the Passion, baked in the oven of the tomb, reserved in churches, brought to altars, furnishes the faithful each day with food from heaven.132

Read John 6:48-52 Don’t Forget, all the Disciples are Jews… It was forbidden to drink blood. This is why they balked at Jesus, when he said MY BLOOD IS REAL DRINK! How is it possible that the Disciples would know about flesh and blood?

If the Old Testament manna was SuperNatural bread, from heaven, can the New Testament be symbolic? If so, that would mean that the Old Testament covenant was better than the New Testament covenant. For the Jews ATE the manna, in the desert. Basic rule of biblical studying is that the New Testament is always better than the Old Testament:

Jesus is better than Moses, Abraham, Jonah, David. Mary is better than EVE! Peter is better than Eliakhim!

The Old manna: The Israelites died in the desert. The new manna: You will have eternal life! This will live forever! The manna I will give you is my flesh (Remember the Quail at night, the flesh, coming down from heaven!)

1. If the Eucharist is the new manna, it is all about Jesus death on the cross, and the glorified resurrection of Jesus!

John 6:62 But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you? 63If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?

Read Luke 24:1-5 Jesus can appear where he will, when he will, HOWEVER he will! So, under the Ascension of our Lord Jesus Christ, he took his glorified and resurrected body, also the crucified body to heaven, and made an everlasting sacrifice to all the Gentiles and Jews ( Malachi 1:11) The Eucharist is the heavenly manna brought down to earth! It is not earthly bread!

 

[hawkeye125646]

**3) The bread of the presence

The First worship of God revolved around the Tabernacle. In the center, (The Holy of Holies!) “Thou shalt also make a table of shittim wood: two cubits shall be the length thereof, and a cubit the breadth thereof, and a cubit and a half the height thereof. And thou shalt overlay it with pure gold, and make thereto a crown of gold round about. And thou shalt make unto it a border of an hand breadth round about, and thou shalt make a golden crown to the border thereof round about. And thou shalt make for it four rings of gold, and put the rings in the four corners that are on the four feet thereof. Over against the border shall the rings be for places of the staves to bear the table. And thou shalt make the staves of shittim wood, and overlay them with gold, that the table may be borne with them. And thou shalt make the dishes thereof, and spoons thereof, and covers thereof, and bowls thereof, to cover withal: of pure gold shalt thou make them. And thou shalt set upon the table showbread before me always.” (Exodus 25:23-30)

The 1) Ark of the Covenant, (Father!) 2) The Golden Lampstand (he Holy Spirit!) and 3) The Bread of the Presence (Jesus the son)

1. The Ark of the Covenant was the throne of God!
2. The Golden Lampstand was referred to as the Menorah… It had 7 candles on it, which were to be lit ALL THE TIME!
3. The bread of the presence was to be set on a Golden table and put inside the holy place!

So when you came into the tabernacle, on the right you would have the Golden Table, to the left, you would have the Menorah (Tongues of fire! PENTACOST!) , in front of you would be a veil…. Behind the vale, would be the Ark of the Covenant. There were 3 symbols. Here we have The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, hidden in the old tabernacle of the old testament!

Read Leviticus 24:1-9 1) There were 12CAKES ( Which represented the 12 tribes) Set out on the Sabbath, as a sacrifice to the Lord! 2) This bread ( Cake!) is a perpetual dew, to be continually before the Lord as a covenant forever. 3) The Lampstand had to burn CONTINUALLY, with the bread! 4) The Bread of the Presence was sacred 5) The Translation of THE BREAD OF THE PRESENCE can have 2 meanings: 1) Hebrew translation: Presence and 2) Face. The BREAD OF THE FACE! It is an unbloody sacrifice… also, wine

Exodus 25:29 And you shall make its dishes, and its spoons, and its covers, and its bowls for pouring: of pure gold shall you make them. This is to show the bread and the wine of the Presence!A)

Read 1 Samuel 21: 1-6 The priests were abstain from relations, when being priest. While they were sacrificing, they would do their priestly duties! Reference this to

Read Matthew 12:1-7 What could be greater than the Temple? It was the dwelling place of God on earth…. Except when God HIMSELF (Jesus!) is there! Jesus is saying I am like David (Being the King!) Jesus Apostles are like Davids followers. David and his followers could work, on the Sabbath, so to, could Jesus’ followers. Jesus. The Priests themselves work on the Sabbath, and are guiltless. So, Jesus is making the Apostles the Priests of the New Covenant! What does the Priest do on the Sabbath? He offers the BREAD OF THE PRESENCE!

Jesus is the new Temple. The Apostles are the Priests. The Apostles were plucking Grain, which makes bread! Remember the fact that the New Covenant is better than the old? How is it the Jews, during that time knew about the Eucharist?

1. The Eucharist was the new BREAD OF THE PRESENCE. If the old bread of the presence communicated the Presence of God, the new Bread of the Presence will be better
2. Jesus was laying claim that he will be the new temple:Read John 2:13-22 You will see that Jesus Body is God made Flesh His body is God is WITH US! With Jesus’ Body, we encounter the NEW TEMPLE! The Eucharist is the new temple of the NEW covenant!

The Eucharist and the Passover

1.  The Eucharist transcends time. Like the Passover takes the Jews back to the freedom of Egypt!

2.  As our Jewish ancestors said Exodus 13:8 And thou shalt shew thy son in that day, saying, [This is done] because of that [which] the LORD did unto me when I came forth out of Egypt. We too will be able to say: We celebrate the Eucharist to say “ Jesus died for MY sins! We, also, personally, came out of Egypt. When Jesus Christ went to the cross, he did it FOR EVERY ONE OF US! EVERYONE!

3.  The Eucharist takes us back in time, to the freedom from Egypt!

4.  We now look forward to the RESURRECTION OF OUR BODY! The Eucharist is  a foretaste of what is to come…. It is our Journey, like the Jews, who ate Manna in the desert, only better!  We will come to the new Jerusalem. We will be in paradise!

5.  We are to fully body, mind and soul in heaven. We are to, in remembrance of the Last supper, a nd the crucifixion, know that this is a perpetual ordinance for all of eternity!

6.  The Eucharist is the BREAD OF THE PRESENCE, THE FACE, which is valed, in the tabernacle, until the mass ( The sacrifice of the royal Priesthood, with Jesus being high priest!) He is to be with us NOW!

This was a dissertation of Dr Brant Pitre on Jesus and The Jewish Roots of the Eucharist! May God bless you! **

 

[PeterJohn]

The answer to this puzzle is contained in one word friend… Faith.
If it were a no brainer, God wouldn’t have given you a brain.
In the end there is no sure way to know, only a fairly sure way.
Regaurdless of which, you need faith.

Protestantism is a new way of thinking. With these thought patterns one(a Protestant) must then deal with the previous 2000 years of what Christianity was (Roman catholic + Orthodox). In disagreeing for whatever reasons, (and there are many many different reasons of disagreement), a Protestant must try to find new ways of interpreting the scripture( and there are many many thousand different interpritations amongst Protestants). But can we just invent new ideas 1500-2012 years after Christ on how we are to worship/live? Can we honestly guess at what Christ REALY intended now? 2000 years later? Or did Christ preserve the truth(John 16:1-15). Is it possible for God, That maybe He could have actually established an organization similar to the one he had before in isreal but this time, one that would not see demise? (Matt 16:18) and if God saw fit to create an organization that were to last thru time by never being overcome by hell’s gates, and being led in All Truth, could/would He instill a shepherd similar to Moses or any other leader of Gods people?(Matt 16:19) and in conclusion, if God would/could will these things to happen, would this/could this organization hold the true meanings behind what Jesus intended when he said, “This is My body”? Or if not we can invent new ways to look at this 2000 years after the happening that no one can agree on and we can all just hope someone will be right or that it’s all just about a personal relationship and that’s all.

 

[Linda_Marie]

Hi Carl,
Sorry for the delay in responding, I just noticed your question this morning. The Ante-Nicene Chruch refers to the writings of the early church fathers (ECF’s) prior to the council of Nicea, approx. 325. Some would argue that they are more closely related to Protestants because of their divergent views on different topics and doctrines. Even Pope Benedict in one of his books has stated that the ECF’s are not Roman Catholic or Protestant, but Catholic, ie univiersal, believers in Christ.

When I have looked into the Ante-Nicene ECF’s I have not found unequivocal teachings about many Roman Catholic beliefs such as the papacy, priesthood, Mass as propitiatory, Marian dogma’s, the Real Presence as the physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist. **As time went on, especially after Constantine declared Christianity the religion of the empire, **things began to develop quickly. Shortly after Nicea, the Mass began to take on the propitiatory nature in some parts of the Chruch, and not others. The Priesthood as a distinct office and function from the the priesthood of believers began to develop, especially w/Cyprian. These are just a few examples.

If you have any more questions I will try my best to answer. Blessings

This is untrue. Constantine did NOT make Christianity the religion of the Roman Empire. He only made it legal to be a Christian where before, Christians were being fed to the lions in the arena. Christians no longer faced martyrdom just for believing.

The Edict of Milan

“When I, Constantine Augustus, as well as I, Licinius Augustus, fortunately met near Mediolanurn (Milan), and were considering everything that pertained to the public welfare and security, we thought, among other things which we saw would be for the good of many, those regulations pertaining to the reverence of the Divinity ought certainly to be made first, so that we might grant to the Christians and others full authority to observe that religion which each preferred; whence any Divinity whatsoever in the seat of the heavens may be propitious and kindly disposed to us and all who are placed under our rule.”

Check the ECF out for yourself.

Early Church Fathers

Fathers of the Church on the Eucharist

The Eucharistic Theology of Early Church Fathers

The Real Presence

The Church was not known as ‘Roman’ Catholic until it was added as a pejorative by Protestants after Trent. The Church did not then, and does not now, call itself ‘Roman’ Catholic. It is The Catholic Church, as Pope Benedict XVI quite correctly pointed out.

 

[Cal_Fullerton]

Let me put it this way. Which is more real, a love one whose picture you have or the love one present with you.
That is the difference in your question. You seem to think that having Jesus in your heart is more real than Having His Body and Blood nourish you. Please don’t take offense at my being so blunt but having Jesus in your heart kinda sounds like an over used clique that has no true meaning.

Hi adrift.

 

[Cal_Fullerton]

Your right they do. Partaking in the Lords Supper is an important to do and all Churches should
offer it in a respectful manner and people should take it respectfully remembering what Jeusus did for us, but its also a joyous memory in that he is risne. I know what you mean Jesus is in my heart also always.

That’s wonderful, Luvtosew. You’re my sister!