The Eucharist: Real Presence or symbol?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RedDawgMCM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by Dokimas
We have quite different understandings, mine are not based on ritualistic things but on relationship.
The OT rituals foreshaddowed the coming of Jesus. In and of themselves, they did nothing or God would not have done away with the Old Covenant replacing it with the New.
Is it your opinion that catholic doctrine is ritual without relationship?
The ritual on the night of original Passover is quite biblical and certainly Effected something for those who did it. Ie save life of thier child.
 
If you saw Jesus hanging on the cross after he died, would you go up to him and drink his blood and eat is flesh?
I saw your first post…that you don’t believe in the real presence…indeed it is in the Bible!
MATTHEW 26:26 “And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. [27] And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. [28] For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.”

Remember: Jesus says, this IS my body and blood. Jesus does not say, this is a symbol of my body and blood

This link will help you: scripturecatholic.com/the_eucharist.html#eucharist-IIb

God Bless! 😃
 
The OT rituals foreshaddowed the coming of Jesus. In and of themselves, they did nothing or God would not have done away with the Old Covenant replacing it with the New.
Right. I would say they did something since God gave them as such and everything that God gives is worth everything. Now we have new ones. We as Catholics know that God has given us new Rituals to celebrate the life, death and resurrection of Christ. New Rituals as we wait for his coming again. In the Old, the Jews celebrated the Passover, today we celebrate the Passover in teh Eucharist. In the Old they had circuncision. Today, we have the Baptism, these are all Rituals given to us by God, and so forth. As you see New Ones prevailed. Of course, I cannot expect you to know this since you are not a Catholic, you wouldnt have way of knowing.
Have you ever heard this?
Code:
Tantum ergo Sacramentum
Veneremur cernui:
Et antiquum documentum
Novo cedat ritui:
Praestet fides supplementum
Sensuum defectui.

Genitori, Genitoque
Laus et iubilatio,
Salus, honor, virtus quoque
Sit et benedictio:
Procedenti ab utroque
Compar sit laudatio.
Amen.

Down in adoration falling,
Lo! the sacred Host we hail,
Lo! o’er ancient forms departing
Newer rites of grace prevail;
Faith for all defects supplying,
Where the feeble senses fail.

To the everlasting Father,
And the Son Who reigns on high
With the Holy Spirit proceeding
Forth from each eternally,
Be salvation, honor blessing,
Might and endless majesty. Amen.
 
Come now. Discussing with you gets no where. You only seem to want to attack what you don’t want to understand.

What I believe is that the rituals do NOTHING. It’s the obedience they represent that is everything.

Ritual is like an idol.

The idol can do nothing as Elijah showed the prophets of Baal.
The ritual - in and of itself - does nothing.

BUT - God, knowing that we are physical beings, gave us rituals so that we could relate. My point is that he NEVER abolished rituals. He simply changed them.

A ritual is not like an idol - it may be like an icon - but nbot an idol. An idol is an evil thing, because it is worshipped. An icon, on the other hand is a reminder of something. Do NOT confuse the two . . .
If anybody truly believes that rituals were abolished in the New Covenant - they neither understand the Gospel nor the will of God.
 
The ritual - in and of itself - does nothing.

**BUT **- God, knowing that we are physical beings, gave us rituals so that we could relate. My point is that he NEVER abolished rituals. He simply changed them.

A ritual is not like an idol - it may be like an icon - but nbot an idol. An idol is an evil thing, because it is worshipped. An icon, on the other hand is a reminder of something. Do NOT confuse the two . . .
If anybody truly believes that rituals were abolished in the New Covenant - they neither understand the Gospel nor the will of God.
Our physical part is the small part of us. Ask Anne Johnson Flint (when you get to Heaven where she is right now.) Google her and read her story.
 
The OT rituals foreshaddowed the coming of Jesus. In and of themselves, they did nothing or God would not have done away with the Old Covenant replacing it with the New.
Dok, what’s wrong with ceremonies or rites used in a place of worship? They don’t defocus from Jesus; they focus on Jesus Christ. 👍
 
They are busy being persecuted for the apostolic faith and defending the apostolic faith. They are easy to spot around the world, because they walk around with a flame looking hat upon their heads and their vestments have not changed since apostolic times. These are very peculiar defenders of the apostolic faith.
And nothing has changed since then. It still apply to today this command. Thank you.
The Smyrnaeans probably were trying to do things their way when this letter was sent to them. I dont no why we have become so acceptive of things that are not from God now and days. Rebellious people always existed but they were stopped. Today, rebellious men seem to have a great amount of freedom to do whatever they want without condemnation, that is why they seem to be growing everywhere. ** Where are those who were commanded to protect the Truth?**
 
What ever happened to God said it, and I believe it? Jesus himself commands His disciples to practice His rituals;

Luke 22:17
Then he took a cup, 6** gave thanks, and said, **“Take this and share it among yourselves;
18
for I tell you (that) from this time on I shall not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”
19
7 Then he took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which will be given for you; **do this in memory of me.” **

Matthew 28:18
11 Then Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
19
**Go, therefore, 12 and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them **in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,
20
teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. 13 And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”

John 20:21
14 (Jesus) said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.”
22
15 And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit.
23
16 **Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.” **

Acts 2:42
8 They devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life, to the breaking of the bread and to the prayers.

Hebrews 10:25
We should not stay away from our assembly, 13 as is the custom of some

Jesus raised Marriage between man and a woman to a sacrament. Marriage itself is performed by a rite (ritual) protected by God, because what God has joined together “let no man put asunder”, this marriage rite is raised to a sacrament because God has infused His Love sacramentally in the marriage rite between a man and a woman.

Peace be with you
Dok, what’s wrong with ceremonies or rites used in a place of worship? They don’t defocus from Jesus; they focus on Jesus Christ. 👍
 
Is there any question? Real Presence. Seems that He was pretty clear.

Interesting that as far back as the Nicene Creed…there was no argument about that. Even Luther didn’t deny the Real Presence.

How people got so far away from it I have no idea:shrug:
 
Is there any question? Real Presence. Seems that He was pretty clear.

Interesting that as far back as the Nicene Creed…there was no argument about that. Even Luther didn’t deny the Real Presence.

How people got so far away from it I have no idea:shrug:
I

I understand that pride makes a man act in rebellious. they dont like authority over them. The Church represents authority and some will never go for that. they like to walk around representing that authority themselves. Martin luther was a rebellious man and that is what he passed on to his followers.
 
You can give me this? What I was pointing out was that Jesus was talking symbolically here. I mean Jesus was not saying that He was really bread here was He? Well what was He saying? He says “he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.” So eating the bread of life in this context is comming to the Lord and **believing **So how do we do that? Well Jesus says Jn.6:63b the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. So Jesus says that the way we eat His body and drink His blood is to BELEIVE the words He says.
Yes Richard he was. As I asked before if he was just telling everyone that he was just a symbol why would they call him MAD for that. Why would they walk away for that??

And you are not correct, believing in Christ is not the same as receiving his actual Bread and wine, if this were true, then why do we receive ACTUAL bread and wine, IT is not a mere SYMBOL it is LIVING bread from Heaven.

IF that were true and the bread was a symbol why would Jesus say EAT this, and DRINK this??? Can you eat a mere symbol, or dirnk a symbol???
 
He also said to pluck out one’s eye and cut off one’s hand. Did He mean this literally?
Well look at the reaction when he was teaching it, was it accepted, was it understood, did many walk away? No, THey understood THAT teaching also, but accepted it.

Why did others not walk away from that one then, and walk away from his teaching of the Eucharist then, why did they not call him MAD for that one then? Unless as I explained they understood that teaching also. BUt they accepted that one, they did not walk away on that one.😃
 
After placing faith in God, in the NT, in the Catholic Church’s interpretations, you then must place faith in the humans of the early church having had everything right from the get go. You must place faith in ECFs and the Catholic Church’s interpretations of their writings. Takes a lot of faith steps to get to where you are. But then the Apostle Paul said we walk by faith and not by sight. Maybe if you read for just an example, about Protestant thinking regarding Augustine and some things he said figuratively, you might get at least a better understanding of a different belief even if you yourself do not share the same faith. And one can believe in more than symbolic but at the same time in a real presence of God’s spirit. I understand all better now.
Well let me ask you this Matt do you believe that Jesus was both Human and divine? Do you beliieve that he had the power from heaven to do what he did on this earth?

Okay then, if you believe that Jesus was the Son of God who became Man (human) and did have the power to do what he claimed, then how can you REJECT this power he gave to his Apostles,

You answer this question and I will qive up the Catholic belief.

When Jesus said to his Apostles what God has given me, I now give to YOU, Go and spead the good news, Baptise, forgive sin, Take this bread and wine DO THIS etc.

Now do you believe that Jesus had the power to extend his power, or was his power false.

IF his power was false, I can understand you saying he cannot extend this power to his Disciples, if you claim you believe in this power, then how can you reject it when he gave it to his Disciples. Do you not think Jesus had his reasons for becoming human also???

So my question is simple, Did Jesus have the authority to forgive sins, cure the sick, etc as a HUMAN? Was Jesus Christ fully HUMAN as us, Did he have power from Heaven? IF you agree how can the power he extended to his Apostles be false then, Would that not make Jesus a liar???:eek:
 
I don’t know any believer who takes it lightly. All one can do is place their faith where they believe the Holy Spirit is guiding them to be when they open their heart to God’s Spirit.

Just because something may or may not be “history” does not mean it is perfect. Many things have occured in history which have not exactly been good things. But neither does it mean something is not true. We simply truly do not know in matters of faith and belief as much as we may want to believe we do. That is why it is called faith. You may not be a revisionist but the Catholic Church has revised disciplines or guidelines thru the yrs.

Would a closeted gay priest having a secret homosexual relationship unbeknownst to you be Biblical? What about the priests who have molested children or the bishops would who have covered it up? Baptism by immersion of someone of a greater age than infancy is clearly found in the Bible. But assuming households had infants, there are examples of households being baptized as well. So it comes down to faith.

The question is not so much about whether Jesus promised truth. It is more about whether He has to correct or reform His Church and where He takes it, to prevent the gates from prevailing as He promised they would not do. And again that is where faith comes in. I do not understand why folks can not believe they “know” if that is what they need. While at the same time recognizing faith and belief is not the same as absolute certainty. I am sorry but that concept just totally escapes my reasoning. But I guess we may just have to agree to disagree. God bless you on your walk and peace.
What are you talking about Matt? And my answer is yes, a closet gay priest is quite biblical is, it is called a SIN. ANd what about a Priest that sins and covers it up, that would also be called a sin. What is a Priest called that promises to Love Christ, and teach his word and then fall from grace, and chooses sin, Simple, check out History, the word is a JUDAS, a betrayer of Christ.

What are you driving at now? Are you trying to say that because a Priest falls from grace and chooses sin over God’s work makes the truth he is teaching false? Then what about the truth that CHrist taught then?? DId because Judas betray Christ make the truth Christ teaches false also then, Because then, it is the same thing.

What is the difference between a Priest falling to sin, and Judas falling to sin? Did they both not betray God?

Tell me Matt, do you not think that Jesus knew Judas would betray him??? Do you not think that Jesus knew that a Priest would also betray him? Why do you think that Jesus warned us that the devil was the Master of DISQUISE in HIS own clothing?

And are you trying to say that if a Priest falls from grace and chooses sin over God as Judas did, Man can bring down the CC? Because if you feel that a mere Priest can bring down the CC, then you are saying that the devil can beat Christ! IS that what you are saying, because you sure implied it.

When someone says that the CC was reformed, who reformed it then? IT has to be Man, because the Holy Spirit is who guides the CC, Jesus promised us that, IF the CC is reformed it has to be by Man then, Not God. God did not promise us to reform the CHurch, he promised us he would be with it always, until the end of time.

So what are you saying Matt?
 
What are you talking about Matt? And my answer is yes, a closet gay priest is quite biblical is, it is called a SIN. ANd what about a Priest that sins and covers it up, that would also be called a sin. What is a Priest called that promises to Love Christ, and teach his word and then fall from grace, and chooses sin, Simple, check out History, the word is a JUDAS, a betrayer of Christ.

What are you driving at now? Are you trying to say that because a Priest falls from grace and chooses sin over God’s work makes the truth he is teaching false? Then what about the truth that CHrist taught then?? DId because Judas betray Christ make the truth Christ teaches false also then, Because then, it is the same thing.

What is the difference between a Priest falling to sin, and Judas falling to sin? Did they both not betray God?

Tell me Matt, do you not think that Jesus knew Judas would betray him??? Do you not think that Jesus knew that a Priest would also betray him? Why do you think that Jesus warned us that the devil was the Master of DISQUISE in HIS own clothing?

And are you trying to say that if a Priest falls from grace and chooses sin over God as Judas did, Man can bring down the CC? Because if you feel that a mere Priest can bring down the CC, then you are saying that the devil can beat Christ! IS that what you are saying, because you sure implied it.

When someone says that the CC was reformed, who reformed it then? IT has to be Man, because the Holy Spirit is who guides the CC, Jesus promised us that, IF the CC is reformed it has to be by Man then, Not God. God did not promise us to reform the CHurch, he promised us he would be with it always, until the end of time.

So what are you saying Matt?
Matt thinks that if one believes than it must be true. Relativism at best. Just because somebody says they have the Holy Spirit, it doesnt mean it is true. they have been told they do and they simply believed. But we know that the HS would not lead anyone from God’s Church. that is how we know they dont have it. If the CC is right about the Eucharist then any contrary to that, it is not from the HS. The Father, the Son and the HS are not in contradiction with one another, that we know for sure. Thanks be to God there is a wrong and a right. I think people, now and days are very confused about the Truth. They can no longer identify it. Today, it is all about emotionalism friendship. it is all about being friends, forget about defending the Truth. We Catholics are called to be defenders of the Truth, the Faith, and not to seek friendship. Many of us have become cowards and no longer care about what is True.
 
Hi Denise, I’ve posted more than once we may have to agree to disagree and let it go. But while I won’t name names certain posters more than others keep following me around it seems and bringing it up everywhere I go! I simply can not believe that anyone’s faith, not just Catholics, can be proclaimed to be for certain the truth. Well it can be proclaimed 🙂 but to truly know with absolute 100% certainty is another thing I believe. Here we are on the non Catholic forum but yup many here stand up very well for what they believe! 🙂 Peace my friend.
Oh Matt, then you are in big trouble my friend, I can see why you are so confused. You see that is why we as Catholic’s have not doubt in what we are taught because we believe this ONE simple sentence.

Our Lords great command was FOLLOW ME!! He called others to himself. By that simple sentence he introduced to the world that man should have charge over man.

He who is God would teach and redeem and sanctify through a Human Nature which he had taken from his Mother Mary.

And he worked through this human nature here, and continues to work through the human nature through his Apostles, not angels, but he would place his power in the hands of Human beings. his Apostles.

He said to them Follow Me, His Apostles, they were called to be the light of the world, salt of the earth, the city that could not be hid.

Can you not see that it was evident from the Beginning. He INTENED to PROLONG his teaching, and his Reigh, and his very life unto the world. That he would comminicate through certain powers that he brought with him to this earth.

That this teaching would continue through Certain Humans to be given to us??

Tell me Matt what was the purpose of the Apsotles if not to teach the truth? I mean really, why waste the whole N.T on teaching them???

And wny would he teach these same Apostles that the Bread of Life is indeed the true body of Christ, and that if you do not EAT and DRINK this you have no life in you!

And if we can not believe this truth 100% and do not believe 100% that these simple words The Advocate the Holy Spirit will lead you to all truth, until the end of age, then what do we have???

Its really pretty simple, as the scripture itself teaches, you are either hot or cold, there is not lukewarm in our faith for Christ.
 
Is there any question? Real Presence. Seems that He was pretty clear.

Interesting that as far back as the Nicene Creed…there was no argument about that. Even Luther didn’t deny the Real Presence.

How people got so far away from it I have no idea:shrug:
It started when they felt that they could believe what THEY wanted to believe. When they decided that they all had the truth in Them!

It no longer became listen to the teachings of the Early Fathers of the Church, it became you have your own truth. People left the Church the Pilar of all truth, and made up their own truth.

They no longer were taught, they take scriture and claim to have the Holy Spirit to teach themself their own truth, They make the Holy Spirit out to be a liar, because by saying you have the Power of the Holy Spirit, and then turn around and have 2 different truths cannot be possible.

Either the Church is the Pilar of all truth and led by the Holy Spirit and Christ is correct, or they are right and we have no Holy Spirit of truth. Because if the Church is correct we must all have the ONE truth, the same truth. OR they are right and there is many truths and the Holy Spirit divides us.🤷
 
Our physical part is the small part of us. Ask Anne Johnson Flint (when you get to Heaven where she is right now.) Google her and read her story.
Was she canonized a saint by the Catholic Church? If not - we don’t know whether she made it to heaven. We can hope and pray that she did.

As for our physical self being small - it is what we DO with our physicality, along with our spirituality that determines where we will spend eternity. If I were you - I would not underestimate the importance of the physical because God doesn’t (Matt. 25:31-46).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top