[E=Todd520
[/QUOTE]
;7230660]Joe, your post brings several thoughts to mind
Members of the RCC can obtain an official position on any topic but that does not equal agreement.
For example, many Catholics do not believe in transubstantiation per the official Church teaching.
- Is this issue really ‘resolved’ in your mind for these non-conforming Catholics?
- Is it appropriate to compare these non-conforming Catholics to Protestants with similar views?
- Why is it essential that we agree on every aspect of interpretation?
- Is it even possible to reach such concensus?
True, but in the end we defer to the authority of the CC, and if we want to continue to reject, say, the teaching of the Eucharist, we can leave, but we are expected to embrace the teaching of the CC regarding the Eucharist if we want to belong to the CC. I was just looking for the same sort of universal authority in the protestant sphere.
Yes, this issue is really resolved in my mind for these non-conforming Catholics, who ever they are; I have yet to meet a catholic who rejects the Eucharistic teaching of the CC, but that is their right of course. Defer to the church founded by God or find another church that conforms to your beliefs - would be my answer to those non-conforming Catholics. I respect their rights to believe their interpretation over the interpretation of the church founded by Jesus.
It is essential to me (I respect your right to believe the opposite) - that we as Christians agree vis-a-vis the Eucharist because there can be only one truth regarding the Eucharist for the simple fact that the spirit of truth does not guide us into conflicting truths, (truth is not relative in this case) - and I believe it is important to Jesus that we have access to the truth vis-a-vis His Body and Blood for Jesus said:
“Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life.”
Todd, you said:
Is it even possible to reach such consensus?
Well, that is why I started this thread; I was hoping to find that answer, but so far, no luck.