THE EUCHARIST - How can anyone claim to “believe” in Jesus, if they deny what He taught and will not follow what He said?

[MrS]

Talking on behalf of my beliefs sarcastically like that is offensive. How about if I said this of you…

I believe that my Church is Jesus’ church therefore I can disregard scripture and do pretty much what I want. I will get on my knees and worship a wafer instead of Jesus if I want. If scripture disagrees with anything I do I just need to look at the catechism for a reason why I don’t have to take God’s word as the final authority. If I can get away with sin in my Church and the Church ok’s it, then God will ok it too.

Doesn’t quite fit with what you believe now does it? You guys are doing exactly that to our faith and you are misrepresenting us.

However… a Catholic position cannot be refuted from Scripture because Scripture will support it.

However… a non Catholic position can be refuted from Scripture when it is show that the use and misuse of verses contradicts other verses.

Scripture verses will not contradict when properly interpreted. That is something nonC’s can’t understand or just won"t address

 

[mozart-250]

THE EUCHARIST - How can anyone claim to “believe” in Jesus, if they deny what He taught and will not follow what He said?

God Bless You.

Just because someone disagrees with you over how a particular passage of Scripture is to be interpreted, it does not logically follow that they are “denying what He taught” and “will not follow what He said”.

Let’s at least make sense here.

 

[jay29]

Just because someone disagrees with you over how a particular passage of Scripture is to be interpreted, it does not logically follow that they are “denying what He taught” and “will not follow what He said”.

Let’s at least make sense here.

It is all based on AUTHORITY. The deformers of the 1500s had none.

http://www.stmaryperth.com/Sacraments/images/Pope Benedict XVI Blessing of the Host.jpg

 

[mozart-250]

It is all based on AUTHORITY. The deformers of the 1500s had none.

No…authority is a separate issue. Let’s stick to the issue at hand.

The statement was made that because someone disagreed with Catholics concerning the interpretation of a passage of Scripture that they “deny what He taught” and “will not follow what He said”.

That statement just is not logical.

 

[jay29]

No…authority is a separate issue. Let’s stick to the issue at hand.

The statement was made that because someone disagreed with Catholics concerning the interpretation of a passage of Scripture that they “deny what He taught” and “will not follow what He said”.

That statement just is not logical.

The CORRECT interpretation of scripture RESTS on AUTHORITY. If you don’t have the AUTHORITY, your interpretation just might be WRONG, jeopardizing your soul.

 

[po18guy]

Talking on behalf of my beliefs sarcastically like that is offensive. How about if I said this of you…

I believe that my Church is Jesus’ church therefore I can disregard scripture and do pretty much what I want. I will get on my knees and worship a wafer instead of Jesus if I want. If scripture disagrees with anything I do I just need to look at the catechism for a reason why I don’t have to take God’s word as the final authority. If I can get away with sin in my Church and the Church ok’s it, then God will ok it too.

Doesn’t quite fit with what you believe now does it? You guys are doing exactly that to our faith and you are misrepresenting us.

There is not one whit of sarcasm there. Sadly, many have been mislead to actually believe this. First: there is no hidden or secret “remnant” church. I am sorry if you have been mislead. Christ said, in the bible, that the gates of hell would not prevail against His church. I believe Him. Do you have credible evidence to the contrary? Step up with it!

Again, you do not know the actual Catholic church. I know not what you’ve heard, but there is not one contradiction between scripture and the church, or between the church and scripture (when taken in context). You will face a stout defense of the faith here, as the truth demands nothing less.

 

[twosweetgirls]

You know, this is one teaching–really, TRUTH–that further cemented that the Catholic Church is all Jesus said it is! He said “this IS My body”, “this IS My blood”. . . not “this is My body and blood, but you can interpret that as a symbol in whatever terms you want”. There was no way, for me, to call myself a Christian and NOT believe that Jesus MEANT WHAT HE SAID!

Hope that makes sense.

 

[po18guy]

Just because someone disagrees with you over how a particular passage of Scripture is to be interpreted, it does not logically follow that they are “denying what He taught” and “will not follow what He said”.

Let’s at least make sense here.

The Eucharist has been believed in and practiced by the Twelve, Saint Paul, all of the Early Church Fathers and every generation since then, without interruption. If you do not believe in and practice the Eucharist, you make yourself superior to every preceding generation, as well as the Apostles. That is a tough row to hoe!

We say all of this for the sake of your soul. If your liturgical practice is not ancient, as the church is ancient, what are you missing?

 

[Matariel]

Jesus said, “I am the true vine.” and “I am the good shepherd.” You don’t believe that Jesus is actually a vine or a shepherd? He was talking symbolically there. So how is it that when he said “I am the bread of life.” you believe that actually becomes bread?

That simply doesn’t make sense, as the phrases “I am the true vine.” and “I am the good shepherd.” are not logically analogous to “My Body is true food, and My Blood is true drink.”

And also, clearly and unequivocally, Saint Paul states this in 1 Corinthians 10:16.

And plus, all of the Church Fathers, including Saint Ignatius of Antioch, and Saint Clement of Rome (personal disciples and successors to the Apostles) clearly exibit the primitive Christian belief in the Real Presence.

Unfortunately, many Protestant communities nowadays hold to the relatively modern Zwinglian view of the Real Absence, which makes a mockery of Christ’s promises and statements in the Gospels.

 

[po18guy]

That simply doesn’t make sense, as the phrases “I am the true vine.” and “I am the good shepherd.” are not logically analogous to “My Body is true food, and My Blood is true drink.”

And also, clearly and unequivocally, Saint Paul states this in 1 Corinthians 10:16.

And plus, all of the Church Fathers, including Saint Ignatius of Antioch, and Saint Clement of Rome (personal disciples and successors to the Apostles) clearly exibit the primitive Christian belief in the Real Presence.

Unfortunately, many Protestant communities nowadays hold to the relatively modern Zwinglian view of the Real Absence, which makes a mockery of Christ’s promises and statements in the Gospels.

Sad, but true. What has been lost in the last 500 years?

 

[MrS]

You know, this is one teaching–really, TRUTH–that further cemented that the Catholic Church is all Jesus said it is! He said “this IS My body”, “this IS My blood”. . . not “this is My body and blood, but you can interpret that as a symbol in whatever terms you want”. There was no way, for me, to call myself a Christian and NOT believe that Jesus MEANT WHAT HE SAID!

Hope that makes sense.

Thank you

And I am happy you have received the graces to recognize this.

Each will receive the necessry Grace from God to understand what he or she is capable of understanding or accepting.

And with that come the responsibility to guard what has been received.

The Catholic Church has the greatest responsibility because She has the fullness of the faith.

Now you (and me too, praise God) have the responsibility to declare the Truth of the Real Presence in the Eucharist to any and all who either don’t know, don’t understand, or don’t want to accept.

Jesus said the words… we just need to keep repeating them.

.

 

[O.S.Luke]

Why do you keep asking questions and then in a condescending manner, give a fully detailed answer?? Aren’t you getting tired of insulting those who may not agree with you?

Jimmy doesn’t care if he is condescending or insulting. He certainly doesn’t tire of it.

What is the “official” non-Catholic (Protestant) Christian position on the Eucharist

The United Methodist position:

Christ’s presence in the sacrament is a promise to the church and is not dependent upon recognition of this presence by individual members of the congregation. Holy Communion always offers grace. We are reminded of what God has done for us in the past, experience what God is doing now as we partake, and anticipate what God will do in the future work of salvation. “We await the final moment of grace, when Christ comes in victory at the end of the age to bring all who are in Christ into the glory of that victory” (By Water and the Spirit: A United Methodist Understanding of Baptism, in Book of Resolutions; page 816), and we join in feasting at the heavenly banquet table (Luke 22:14-18; Revelation 19:9).

The Christian church has struggled through the centuries to understand just how Christ is present in the Eucharist. Arguments and divisions have occurred over the matter. The Wesleyan tradition affirms the reality of Christ’s presence, although it does not claim to be able to explain it fully. - from This Holy Mystery, the official United Methodist statement on the Eucharist

O+

 

[mozart-250]

The CORRECT interpretation of scripture RESTS on AUTHORITY. If you don’t have the AUTHORITY, your interpretation just might be WRONG, jeopardizing your soul.

…and if your authority in which you are depending on turns out in the end to be…not quite the authority you expected it to be to be…your interpretation and the interpretations of your authority might be wrong…and according to you…jeopardizing your soul.

But the original posts said absolutely nothing about authority anyway.

So it still is the logic error of twisting different interpretations on a passage of Scripture into “denying what He taught” and “will not follow what He said”

 

[mozart-250]

The Eucharist has been believed in and practiced by the Twelve, Saint Paul, all of the Early Church Fathers and every generation since then, without interruption. If you do not believe in and practice the Eucharist, you make yourself superior to every preceding generation, as well as the Apostles. That is a tough row to hoe!

We say all of this for the sake of your soul. If your liturgical practice is not ancient, as the church is ancient, what are you missing?

I have no desire to debate the Eucharist theologically. As for me, I approach the elements as though they are the body and blood of Christ. Whatever does or does not happen to the elements I leave up to God.

However I have every interest in defending those who interpret Scripture in a different way than you or I might from the illogical charge of “denying what He taught” and “will not follow what He said”.

Would you like that if I said that about you just because we might disagree over the interpretation of a passage of Scripture? Yes or No?

In fact, the whole tone here…the baiting threads…the often triumphal and arrogant attitude of the “one true church” towards us poor, pathetical “heretical” Protestants is really getting tiring and draining. I am taking a very, very long break and hope that I can finally kick my bad habit of arguing Christianity over the internet. And that is not in response to this particular post, but the title of this thread. It is getting very tedious and tiring…

 

[Jimmy_B]

Jimmy …

The United Methodist position:

O+

Thank you O.S. Luke,

Reading the quote that you provided here, there does seem to be some similarities in belief, although not Catholic… but then again, I wasn’t expecting it would be “Catholic”. It is however, closer in belief than some other non-Catholic, Protestant denominations, where some Christians have the “symbolic only” belief.

What have you to say to your Protestant, Christian brethren, who have a “symbolic only” belief regarding the Eucharist?

Thank you for your post and for your quote (above, in post #52).

God Bless you!

Peace

 

[MrS]

Jimmy doesn’t care if he is condescending or insulting. He certainly doesn’t tire of it.

The United Methodist position:

O+

Thank you for explaining the position.

As a Catholic, I hope you understand that the position is really all it is. It is not a reality that you have the Real Presence, which Jesus confected at the Last Supper, His Apostles/Bishops present.

It is not a reality that your communion is, as St Paul discussed, the actual and real presence, Body and Blood, of Jesus Christ.

Nor is the Lutheran communion anything more than a symbol of the Catholic Eucharist.

That requires the valid ordination and succession directly back to the Apostles. How anyone can claim to jump in line, assume authority, and claim a Real Presence, is beyond me.

Well, actually it is not. Jesus warned us in His Word of what will happen to those who assume the ministerial priesthood. Jude reaffirms the Korah punishment in Numbers.

 

[O.S.Luke]

Thank you for explaining the position.

As a Catholic, I hope you understand that the position is really all it is. It is not a reality that you have the Real Presence, which Jesus confected at the Last Supper, His Apostles/Bishops present.

It is not a reality that your communion is, as St Paul discussed, the actual and real presence, Body and Blood, of Jesus Christ.

Nor is the Lutheran communion anything more than a symbol of the Catholic Eucharist.

That requires the valid ordination and succession directly back to the Apostles. How anyone can claim to jump in line, assume authority, and claim a Real Presence, is beyond me.

Well, actually it is not. Jesus warned us in His Word of what will happen to those who assume the ministerial priesthood. Jude reaffirms the Korah punishment in Numbers.

Blessings to you, Mrs.

 

[RobHom]

Talking on behalf of my beliefs sarcastically like that is offensive. How about if I said this of you…

I believe that my Church is Jesus’ church therefore I can disregard scripture and do pretty much what I want. I will get on my knees and worship a wafer instead of Jesus if I want. If scripture disagrees with anything I do I just need to look at the catechism for a reason why I don’t have to take God’s word as the final authority. If I can get away with sin in my Church and the Church ok’s it, then God will ok it too.

Doesn’t quite fit with what you believe now does it? You guys are doing exactly that to our faith and you are misrepresenting us.

You’re right my friend…it does not fit with what we believe. But sadly, what you said above is pretty concise as to what many non-Catholics believe about Catholics… Just look at the people who buy and distribute “Chick tracts”…and many of the others. And whats even more sad about that issue is that few of those people buying into the falsehoods are merely accepting what some other misinformed or misguided person is telling them.

I think though that what some are missing…is that Jimmy B’s question is rather succinct. I have often wondered myself how it is that people can claim to be Christians…yet fail to abide by Christ’s very own words. To put Paul’s words above those of Christ himself, or so it would seem…seems to me to be ludicrous and dangerous to one’s salvation.

To me, as a Catholic…no words of an Apostle or Prophet… or anyone else’s can trump the words of Christ Himself. Sadly, it seems that others can’t get a handle on that.

 

[RobHom]

I have no desire to debate the Eucharist theologically. As for me, I approach the elements as though they are the body and blood of Christ. Whatever does or does not happen to the elements I leave up to God.

Fair enough.

However I have every interest in defending those who interpret Scripture in a different way than you or I might from the illogical charge of “denying what He taught” and “will not follow what He said”.

Would you like that if I said that about you just because we might disagree over the interpretation of a passage of Scripture? Yes or No?

In fact, the whole tone here…the baiting threads…the often triumphal and arrogant attitude of the “one true church” towards us poor, pathetical “heretical” Protestants is really getting tiring and draining. I am taking a very, very long break and hope that I can finally kick my bad habit of arguing Christianity over the internet. And that is not in response to this particular post, but the title of this thread. It is getting very tedious and tiring…

I wonder have you ever spent time on some of the other sites that are predominantly non-Catholic? I have been on sites where the anger and blatant disrespect for the Church, the individual and faith can only be described as outright hatred. Frankly I think some of those people may be psychopaths or sociopaths. I am being serious. Jimmy’s a “lightweight” compared to some of the hate-mongers I’ve seen… (Sorry Jimmy… )

Maybe its Jimmy’s style you take umbrage to. Perhaps you expect all of us to be meek…but he’s not. He’s an ardent defender of the faith. Frankly…he’d make a Jesuit proud. I see nothing wrong with his approach or style… His style is different than mine, and others. But I don’t really think he is being insulting or arrogant. I think he is being honest and forthright…but meekness is not one of his attributes…

 

[po18guy]

Jimmy doesn’t care if he is condescending or insulting. He certainly doesn’t tire of it.

Don’t mistake confidence for condescension! I assure you, it is confidence he displays. No apologies for it either.

Christ’s peace.