The Eucharist: The Body of Christ? ("Respectful Dialogue" thread)

Our Sunday Visitor (via Catholic Culture) ^ | 1/2005 | Marcellino D'Ambrosio, Ph.D.

[hosepipe]

[ Your post was somewhat hard to understand, but if you were saying that Catholics believe Peter was personally given ALL authority then you are wrong. ]

Some say all aostles had equal authority others that Peter had headship..
What is in question is handing down this authority like a sacrament.. or rite of passage.. Any that parse scripture to mean that are Pharisees.. or Nicolaitans..

[defconw]

Yet another reason it’s awesome to be Catholic. Different parish, same message. :)

[markomalley]

1Pe 3:15-17 but in your hearts reverence Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence;and keep your conscience clear, so that, when you are abused, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. For it is better to suffer for doing right, if that should be God's will, than for doing wrong.

(From today's second reading in Mass). One thing our homilist pointed out was that we should always be ready to make a defense with gentleness and reverence...rather than, "IN YOUR FACE...BOOYAH"

I thought it was a particularly timely point (and the homilist is not a FReeper, either, so I know he couldn't have been talking about the FR Religion Forum -- LOL).

[hosepipe]

[ St. Luke’s Redneck Evangelical Catholic Multipurpose Facility ]

LoL,,,,

[big'ol_freeper]

You said: Any that parse scripture to mean that are Pharisees.. or Nicolaitans..

I am glad to see you are embracing the spirit of this thread.

I would say that I respectfully, but strongly and completely, disagree with your personal interpretation of Holy Scripture.

[GCC Catholic]

I agree with the concept, but one can't ever be sure what *some* poster might or might not find offensive. I think there's NOTHING that SOMEBODY won't take offense at. If we're going to have an "everybody calm down" thread designation, part of the assumption might be to take offense less quickly. In the case we're discussing, I really think another poster could have used the same words without comment, the offense being to some extent based on the poster's known positions.

You have a good point. It's as much the part of readers to have good will to not be offended as for posters to try to not offend. As much as it should be a given, that might be something that a "Respectful Dialogue" designation might have to state explicitly. Previous positions certainly affect other readers' opinions of a poster and his or her comments.

[hosepipe]

[ He said 'upon THIS rock...He DID NOT say 'upon YOU (Peter)... Jesus CLEARLY was referring to Himself... ]

Good point..

[hosepipe]

[ I would say that I respectfully, but strongly and completely, disagree with your personal interpretation of Holy Scripture. ]

True.. I can deal with that kind of honesty..
I reject Roman Catholic, EO, and Reformed theology in parts.. or in some cases mostly..

[markomalley]

In sum, dear markomalley, I suspect too much water has gone under the bridge around here to achieve "respectful dialogue" because that would require the participants to forgive unconditionally, no strings attached, reading the current post only for what it actually says.

Well, in between the snarky comments, there is some actual good dialogue going on with a few of us. I'm trying to read each post carefully and then filter as appropriate.

[Iscool]

‘It is finished’? What does the ‘it’ refer to?”

I couldn’t hear the rest of his sermon. My mind began racing ahead in search of a solution.

Here's where ole Scott messed up...He should have kept his mouth shut and his ears open...

The narrative does not explain his refusal, but it probably points back to Jesus’ pledge not to drink until his Kingdom is manifested in glory.

What Scott might have learned had he paid attention is that the Kingdom Jesus was referring to was a Spiritual Kingdom...NOT a physical Kingdom...

Luk 17:20 And being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God should come, he answering them and said: The kingdom of God cometh not with observation.
Luk 17:21 Neither shall they say: Behold here, or behold there. For lo, the kingdom of God is within you.

AT LAST I had an answer to my question. It was the Passover that was now finished. More precisely, it was Jesus’ transformation of the Passover sacrifice of the Old Covenant into the Eucharistic sacrifice of the New Covenant.

Uh, Scott made this up...It's not scriptural...Scott didn't get it then and he doesn't get it now...

[markomalley]

However, respecting others doesn't mean that you have to agree with incorrect doctrine or compromise belief.

Exactly!!!

[big'ol_freeper]

You said: Good point..

It is only a good point if his personal interpretation of Holy Scripture is correct, which it is not.

[markomalley]

I know for myself as I studied the Scriptures concerning the Holy Spirit I realized that certain faiths appeared to disregard the God-ordained work of the Holy Spirit in place of men's actions and desires.

You know, the funny thing is I agree with you on this sentence. More than you can know.

[big'ol_freeper]

You said: What Scott might have learned had he paid attention is that the Kingdom Jesus was referring to was a Spiritual Kingdom...NOT a physical Kingdom...

I respectfully, but completely, disagree with your personal interpretation of Holy Scripture.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for sharing your insights and that beautiful Scripture! And thank you for your encouragements!

Truly, I do not have a problem with any of them - Eucharist or the Lord's Supper or Shabbat. About half my family is Catholic, some of the non-Catholics are Torah observant and some are not. All are Christian. Praise God!!!

As one who eschews all of the doctrines and traditions of men across the board, my mantra is that we must all love God surpassingly above all else. That is the one and only Great Commandment.

Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. – Matthew 22:37-38

So when my brother says the blessing, drinks the cup and breaks the bread in his Friday Sabbath observance, I know that they know that Jesus Christ is the Lord of the Sabbath and that they are hallowing the precious body and blood of the Lamb.

Likewise, when my other brother's (now in heaven) family observes the Eucharist, I know that they know that they are hallowing the precious body and blood of the Lamb.

Likewise, when my sister's (now in heaven) family observe the Lord's Supper, I know that they know that they are hallowing the precious body and blood of the Lamb.

So, you see, the point to me is that it must always be "about" God, not man. By the way, I have joined with each leg of the family in their observances to hallow the body and blood of the Lamb - except for the Catholic's Eucharist, because I am excluded by the doctrine of the church. That, I believe to be an error of the Roman Catholic Church though I do comply (emphasis mine:)

But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of [that] cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many [are] weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. - I Corinthians 11:28-30

In sum, I therefore remind as many as will listen that the Spiritual Truth which must not be missed in John 6 is to feed on Christ really not symbolically. Absorb the words of God, take Him in - it is the "needful part."

Now it came to pass, as they went, that he entered into a certain village: and a certain woman named Martha received him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary, which also sat at Jesus' feet, and heard his word.

But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me.

And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: But one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her. – Luke 10:38-42

Jesus has promised; that "needful part" - feeding on His words - will not be taken away from us.

To God be the glory, not man, never man.

[hosepipe]

[ It is only a good point if his personal interpretation of Holy Scripture is correct, which it is not. ]

He was in error according to whom?..
The RCC treatment of the Holy Spirit appears to me to be as a doofus..
A drone in the dance of the Hive.. the Eucharist dance..

Somehow I see "the church" as more than that..
More than sacraments, litergy and ceremony.. which is like Judaism..

[Alamo-Girl]

Indeed. Perhaps the caption "No Snarking" would be more communicative than "respectful dialog?" LOLOL!

[Mad Dawg]

When I was a Protestant I engaged in conversations with Catholics, I read Catholic authors and theologians. I learned from them, and it's not impossible that some of them learned from me.

Since I became a Catholic I have read Protestant authors and even on Free Republic, I have engaged in exchanges with Protestants from which I have learned.

Maybe more than a year or 18 months ago I stumbled onto a Protestant Caucus thread about whether believing in Predestination and Election would tend to make one lazy or fatalistic. I didn't know what a Caucus thread was then so I blurted out my opinion that I didn't see any reason the believing one was among the elect wouldn't energize one, fill one with confidence, and make one more spontaneous and creative and all like that than one might be otherwise. I even was complimented on my openness to thinking about a view which I do not hold in the same way as many Protestants do.

I say that no to brag but to assert the possibility of fruitful conversation between Protestants and Catholics.

But
(I’ll even use marianism instead of maryolatry)
if common politeness and avoiding begging the question is going to be viewed and presented as an extraordinary act of generosity and courtesy; if the norm is going to be to depart from the topic (say, Eucharistic theology) to general slams on one another's religion, then we won't get anywhere useful.

It's too bad, really. It is interesting that in the "Unless you eat the flesh" discourse we find "the flesh is of no avail," and it would be a good thing to look at carefully. It is a good (I didn't say right, I said good) observation that there seems a kind of earthiness to the Catholic doctrine, and much could be learned by thinking about whether that's true and, if it is, whether that's a bad thing.

Since Paul in I Cor 3 and Eph 2 talks about us as God's building or being built into a dwelling for God, it might not be a complete waste of time to think about the RC edifice complex, if only some patience and courtesy could be mustered.

But so many harsh and abrasive remarks have been made that many of us or too sore and tender now even for the inadvertent hurts inevitable in conversations of this kind.

But you will not believe anything I say is respectful and I won’t accept probably 80% of what you believe in a religious context.
So the door, rather than opened, is held tightly shut. I find that embarrassing. And, the average door being opaque, the same old misunderstandings persist and each accuse the other of believing things that no one believes, and the same old charges and counter charges are made again and again. It's all very like the flesh -- of no avail.

[Petronski]

The RCC treatment of the Holy Spirit appears to me to be as a doofus.. A drone in the dance of the Hive.. the Eucharist dance..

THIS is the language you choose in your efforts to take part in a respectful dialogue?

[big'ol_freeper]

You said: He was in error according to whom?..
The RCC treatment of the Holy Spirit appears to me to be as a doofus..
A drone in the dance of the Hive.. the Eucharist dance..

I am respectfully sorry that that your personal interpretation of Holy Scripture has led you to this erroneous observation. That happens when one focuses all attention to only part of Divine Revelation without regard to the fullness of Divine Revelation.

Perhaps if one were to pray that such malice were to be removed from one’s heart, one would be open to the fullness of Truth present in the Catholic Church.