He was trying to correct your misunderstanding; if you consider that “being defensive,” then I’m not sure why you’re asking questions here.steve you are getting very defensive in your religion.
Forgive me. It is just difficult for me to imagine that one who says that they have studied the Catholic religion for some time can then ask the questions that you ask. It seems more like you have opened up an anti-Catholic resource book and just started firing away. Sorry if I got the wrong impression.steve you are getting very defensive in your religion. I am tolerant and understand most religions are a little different in one way or another.
Really? Can you show me that in the Bible?The main thing to get to heaven is accepting Jesus as your personal savior.
Assuming that one has had a valid Christian Baptism, we are brothers and sisters in Christ, though estranged brothers and sisters. We are in union with one another and with Christ to the degree we profess and practice the Apostolic faith.Plain as Day we have all done so we are all brothers and sisters in Christ.
God can save whoever he wishes to save.Can one not be saved in a little small church with only 10 members
We believe that only the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches have valid authority to consecrate the elements of bread and wine to become the body and blood of Jesus. Both the Anglican and Lutherans would take us to task on this point. However, for most non-Catholic faith traditions they have exactly what they profess to have: a symbol. We would agree that all they have is a symbol but we would also acknowledge that they do have a spiritual communion of sorts, dependent upon the beliefs of the particular denomination.and hold communion there or is it just the rights of the catholics? It was just made clear to me that the catholic church are the only ones with the authority to even hold communion.
where does it say in the bible that only catholic and eastern orthodox churches can do communion to remember Jesus?Forgive me. It is just difficult for me to imagine that one who says that they have studied the Catholic religion for some time can then ask the questions that you ask. It seems more like you have opened up an anti-Catholic resource book and just started firing away. Sorry if I got the wrong impression.
Really? Can you show me that in the Bible?
Assuming that one has had a valid Christian Baptism, we are brothers and sisters in Christ, though estranged brothers and sisters. We are in union with one another and with Christ to the degree we profess and practice the Apostolic faith.
God can save whoever he wishes to save.
We believe that only the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches have valid authority to consecrate the elements of bread and wine to become the body and blood of Jesus. Both the Anglican and Lutherans would take us to task on this point. However, for most non-Catholic faith traditions they have exactly what they profess to have: a symbol. We would agree that all they have is a symbol but we would also acknowledge that they do have a spiritual communion of sorts, dependent upon the beliefs of the particular denomination.
We believe the Catholic Church is protected from error in matters of faith and morals. Christ promised to remain with his Church until the end of time and promised to send the Holy Spirit to guide it into all truth. We believe what Jesus said.and there is no single church protected from error
Yes I believe that the authors were protected from error while writing has no one person added their own interpretation to the practices the church uses? All churches do this some way or another. but i think if we stick to the blood of Jesus Christ and trying to live the best we can we will all be ok.We believe the Catholic Church is protected from error in matters of faith and morals. Christ promised to remain with his Church until the end of time and promised to send the Holy Spirit to guide it into all truth. We believe what Jesus said.
Do you believe that the human authors of Sacred Scripture were prevented from error by the Holy Spirit when writing the sacred texts that make up our Bible?
No one said it is being done wrong; but those churches you list (and many others, I too have attended, and even belonged to many Protestant denominations) are “doing it in remembrance”, in the various Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox churches the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ - in the way He taught the Apostles at the Last Supper.I have been to baptist, 7th day adventist, pentecostal, non denominal, and a couple other churches and the bread is always the body and the wine always the blood. how can this even be done wrong if your doing it in remembrance of Jesus?
Jesus said to ‘do this in remembrance of me’, again, look back and see what He said before that: “Take this, all of you, and eat it: this is my body which will be given up for you.” “Take this, all of you, and drink from it: this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you and for all men so that sins may be forgiven. Do this in memory of me.”communion is done in remembrance of Christ body and blood. It is about a personal remembrance. It has nothing to do with who in the church is handing it to you. It says “do this in remembrance of me” it is on a personal level.
We believe that only the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches have valid authority to consecrate the elements of bread and wine to become the body and blood of Jesus. Both the Anglican and Lutherans would take us to task on this point. However, for most non-Catholic faith traditions they have exactly what they profess to have: a symbol. We would agree that all they have is a symbol but we would also acknowledge that they do have a spiritual communion of sorts, dependent upon the beliefs of the particular denomination.
Matthew 16. The authority given to the Church by Christ is handed down from Apostles to bishops and unless one can establish a line of succession back to the Apostles, one has not received this authority. One does not “assume” authority in the Church. It is always handed down.where does it say in the bible that only catholic and eastern orthodox churches can do communion to remember Jesus?
Yes the whole time he was using these as symbolic items to use to remember him. He in no way was saying to eat his body and drink his blood was he? And im pretty sure no one here on earth can turn that bread and wine into the actual body and blood of christ. It is all symbolic.No one said it is being done wrong; but those churches you list (and many others, I too have attended, and even belonged to many Protestant denominations) are “doing it in remembrance”, in the various Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox churches the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ - in the way He taught the Apostles at the Last Supper.
Jesus said to ‘do this in remembrance of me’, again, look back and see what He said before that: “Take this, all of you, and eat it: this is my body which will be given up for you.” “Take this, all of you, and drink from it: this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you and for all men so that sins may be forgiven. Do this in memory of me.”
If you believe that the biblical authors were protected from error by the Holy Spirit, would you also agree that he protected the bishops of the Catholic Church who discerned which books would be included in the canon of the Bible? In other words, were they protected from error in choosing the exact 27 books that make up the New Testament and can we be sure that they didn’t leave something out or include something that really isn’t the word of God?Yes I believe that the authors were protected from error while writing has no one person added their own interpretation to the practices the church uses? All churches do this some way or another. but i think if we stick to the blood of Jesus Christ and trying to live the best we can we will all be ok.
hold on so some one added matthew to luke in the last supper and combined them? because these two are not in the same book when it came to the last supper. this is what im talking about every church adding their own spin on thingsMatthew 16. The authority given to the Church by Christ is handed down from Apostles to bishops and unless one can establish a line of succession back to the Apostles, one has not received this authority. One does not “assume” authority in the Church. It is always handed down.
By the way, we do not “do” communion. The Hebrew understanding of the word “remember” was to “make present”. We do not sit around and just remember, in the normal sense of the word, what Christ did for us. His one eternal sacrifice is made present to us at each Mass and we enter into a one-flesh communion with Jesus Christ by consuming, sacramentally, his body, blood, soul and divinity. We become truly one with him and as far as personal relationships are concerned, they get no more intimate than becoming a part of each other.
therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.htmlYes the whole time he was using these as symbolic items to use to remember him. He in no way was saying to eat his body and drink his blood was he? And im pretty sure no one here on earth can turn that bread and wine into the actual body and blood of christ. It is all symbolic.
I referenced Matthew to show the authority that was given to the Church. Yes, the sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted at the last supper. But the authority of the Church is shown in Matthew 16. It received the keys to the kingdom of heaven (Peter, specifically) and the power to bind in heaven what it bound on earth and to loose in heaven what it loosed on earth. It received the very authority of Christ himself which is why it has the authority to do what Jesus did. Those who reject this authority and have distanced themselves from the Church given this authority, have no authority, plain and simple.hold on so some one added matthew to luke in the last supper and combined them? because these two are not in the same book when it came to the last supper. this is what im talking about every church adding their own spin on things
If that is the case, why did Jesus allow many of his followers to leave Him because they misunderstood what he said? See John 6:48 - 59 for Jesus’ teaching on communion, and in John 6:66 ‘Because of this many of his disciples turned back and no longer went about with him.’ If they had misunderstood what Jesus had said surely He would have cleared that up and explained that He meant ‘symbolically’ not ‘literally’.Yes the whole time he was using these as symbolic items to use to remember him. He in no way was saying to eat his body and drink his blood was he?
Those churches that have Apostolic Succession have passed on this ability, directly from Christ himself. For us it most definitely is not symbolic.And im pretty sure no one here on earth can turn that bread and wine into the actual body and blood of christ. It is all symbolic.
Where does the Bible say he was using symbols?Yes the whole time he was using these as symbolic items to use to remember him.
When questioned about this did he ever back down? No. He just kept coming back with even stronger language: “Unless you eat my body and drink my blood you will have no life within you.”He in no way was saying to eat his body and drink his blood was he?
You are correct. But there is one in heaven who can and it is He, acting through the priest, that accomplishes this through the Holy Spirit.And im pretty sure no one here on earth can turn that bread and wine into the actual body and blood of christ.
I think this is wrong because if God intended only certain people to be able to participate in communion he would have mentioned it right there in the last supper. His salvation is available for all who accepts, why would communion or mass be any different?I referenced Matthew to show the authority that was given to the Church. Yes, the sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted at the last supper. But the authority of the Church is shown in Matthew 16. It received the keys to the kingdom of heaven (Peter, specifically) and the power to bind in heaven what it bound on earth and to loose in heaven what it loosed on earth. It received the very authority of Christ himself which is why it has the authority to do what Jesus did. Those who reject this authority and have distanced themselves from the Church given this authority, have no authority, plain and simple.
1 Corinthians 11:27-29I think this is wrong because if God intended only certain people to be able to participate in communion he would have mentioned it right there in the last supper. His salvation is available for all who accepts, why would communion or mass be any different?
God wants all to participate in Communion appropriately, which is why we’re also told to go out and make disciples of all nations.I think this is wrong because if God intended only certain people to be able to participate in communion he would have mentioned it right there in the last supper. His salvation is available for all who accepts, why would communion or mass be any different?
Jesus was using the bread and wine as symbols. Jesus would not have handed them bread if he wanted them to eat his body right? Im pretty sure him being Jesus would have just let them bit his arm or something if he really meant eat his body and drink his blood. You are not actually eating his body in Mass or drinking his real blood. It is to remember and honor the sacrifice Jesus laid down for you. I dont believe Jesus would have used symbolic items if he really wanted you to eat his flesh.Where does the Bible say he was using symbols?
When questioned about this did he ever back down? No. He just kept coming back with even stronger language: “Unless you eat my body and drink my blood you will have no life within you.”
You believe exactly what those who left him believe. How can this man give us his body to eat? This was too hard a teaching for them and apparently for you as well.
You are correct. But there is one in heaven who can and it is He, acting through the priest, that accomplishes this through the Holy Spirit.