[metmom]

What all this proves is there was no agreement on what the Lords supper meant and there was no required belief until 1215 when it was declared a doctrine of the church..and yet even today many deny transubstantiation and have a more reformed view of it

And all it also means is that it's official church doctrine and that to be a *good* Catholic, one must believe it.

That doesn't mean that it's a truth taught by and supported with Scripture.

[RnMomof7]

That doesn't mean that it's a truth taught by and supported with Scripture.

Exactly .. one of the things I have noted over the years this teaching is essential if the RCC wants to keep people chained to the church..

They alone have the magical mystery bread to distribute.. and if you leave the "church" you will never have it again

Lets look at that

IF that was a true doctrine there is not one whiff of scriptural evidence that it would be confined to only the Roman church

But in fact scripture does not support the doctrine but it is used to scare people into staying.

Some years ago I knew several Catholic women that attended and AOG every Sunday , they openly professed that they were saved and trusting in Christ..but every Saturday they went to mass..so they could receive Christ

I found it sad that they felt bound to Rome on the grounds of faulty doctrine...