The real presence of the Lord, Jesus Christ, in holy communion.

[Xeno.of.athens]

Peter replies well that is the Catholics room and they think they’re the only ones here.

It would be lonely for me were it true that Catholics alone see the face of God.

 

[The Liturgist]

It would be lonely for me were it true that Catholics alone see the face of God.

Indeed. And Roman Catholics also have the doctrine of Invincible Ignorance, and recognize the Orthodox and the Assyrians as having legitimate sacraments; graciously they allow us to receive the sacraments from them when we are unable to reach one of our own parishes, and allow Catholics likewise to receive from us under the same circumstances. Unfortunately thus far, to my knowledge, only the Assyrians and some Syriac Orthodox parishes make a point of reciprocating, but that said I do know of some Orthodox clergy who will quietly give the Eucharist to Catholics. Also in the case of Eastern Catholics, many of them consider themselves “Orthodox in Communion with Rome”, and since they follow the same liturgy as the Eastern Orthodox, they become impossible to differentiate from the Orthodox and so in some cases might well receive the Eucharist innocently, due to being unaware of the schism etc. And for instance, if one was traveling in a country where one did not speak the local language, where a large number of Orthodox and Eastern Catholic parishes coexist, for example, some parts of the US and Canada, and in Syria, Ukraine, Belarus and Romania and Hungary, it might be difficult to tell the two apart if one did not speak the language.

The potential for accidentally receiving communion in a church belonging to the other side is further increased since the Orthodox Church refers to itself as “Roman,” especially in those churches in those portions of the Byzantine Empire which were conquered by the Saracens or the Ottomans, and which were ultimately subject to Turkocratia until the downfall of the Ottoman Empire (and Arabic speakers, including Muslims, in those areas refer to the Eastern Orthodox as “Roman”, “Rum” in Arabic, even if the members of the church are ethnically Arabic), and also refers to itself as Catholic.

To me, all of this underscores the importance of dialogue to restore full communion, at least with regards to the Eastern Orthodox and Byzantine Catholics.

 

[concretecamper]

No actually I find the poster mature, kind and very welcoming and I want to display Christian attitudes by honoring his request to stay on topic.

Reminds me of a joke I heard.

A Christian dies and goes to heaven and is greeted at the Pearly gate by Saint Peter. As they walk through heaven, they find different areas one room has all the Baptist and other assemblies of God another yet another denomination and then they see a closed room and St. Peter says be very quiet as we pass this room.

As he gets to the other side of the room, the person asks Saint Peter why did we have to be quiet? Peter replies well that is the Catholics room and they think they’re the only ones here.

I just want you to know that I don’t feel about you the way you feel about me, and I don’t regard your ministry as you regard mine. But I honestly love you with the love of Christ and I pray to God that he fills you with all the fullness of his knowledge and that you grow closer to him each and every day and that your church is blessed.

Reducing His sacrifice on the Cross, His establishing His Church on Earth for the salvation of souls to a joke.

Good luck in explaining that to Him one day.

 

[RileyG]

It's amazing to me how so many bright, scholarly Christian leaders can fail to understand a simple literary figure. Jesus is saying that the bread represents his body, figuratively, and that the wine represents his blood, figuratively, which was soon to see his death on the cross. Christians were encouraged to remind themselves not just that he did this to forgive us our sins, but also so that we could have his presence within us.

So yes, there is a real presence being displayed *figuratively,* so that in our personal experience we experience these things in reality. But what we experience in terms of eating the bread and drinking the wine is not in themselves the transformation. Rather, it is what they represent by our choosing to do this ritual that signifies we accept his presence in our lives on behalf of our redemption. And we are exhorted to take our commitment to this ritual and to what it represents very seriously.

The early Church has always taught Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist. Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, and ancient Church of the East all accept this. It wasn’t even considered “symbolic” until the reformation.

 

[RandyPNW]

The early Church has always taught Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist. Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, and ancient Church of the East all accept this. It wasn’t even considered “symbolic” until the reformation.

Yes, that's probably true. However, I'm not sure the question that the bread and the wine might get "transformed" was on the table either?? I don't suppose that anyone would've questioned that Jesus was "present" when he served up the Communion. And nobody would question whether his presence, via the Holy Spirit, is in the room whenever the Communion is served up either?

 

[ARBITER01]

“Do not see – Saint Cyril of Jerusalem exhorts – in the bread and wine merely natural elements, because the Lord has expressly said that they are his body and his blood: faith assures you of this, though your senses suggest otherwise”.24

​

That's an interesting statement.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Yes, that's probably true. However, I'm not sure the question that the bread and the wine might get "transformed" was on the table either?? <Snip>

It is a divine mystery; a miracle. Most Christians not only know that the real presence is a fulfilment of our Lord's promise to be with us always, but we also believe in miracles, and accept them when they happen. In the case of the Eucharist, each and every time it is celebrated and shared. The world has gotten too sinical; if we doubt a simple little miracle like the Eucharist, how can we believe in His resurrection? His incarnation, His promise of life everlasting?

I not only believe in miracles, I can accept mysteries because the Holy Spirit has given me the faith to do so, and the understanding that God informs me of everything I need to know in the Scriptures; but not everything I want to know. Praise God!!

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

That's an interesting statement.

It seems very much like this statement:

Hebrews 11:1 Geneva Now faith is the ground of things, which are hoped for, and the evidence of things which are not seen.​

 

[ARBITER01]

It seems very much like this statement:

Hebrews 11:1 Geneva Now faith is the ground of things, which are hoped for, and the evidence of things which are not seen.​

Naaaaa,.... that statement from the guy is promoting a personal belief in the situation.

Anytime someone has to try and believe something will happen that GOD hasn't already told them about beforehand and provided the evidence of,..... that's just personal belief. That's not the same as faith.

In that statement, the guy is basically saying to hope against what you see in the natural. That's just personal belief.

 

[jas3]

Naaaaa,.... that statement from the guy is promoting a personal belief in the situation.

"That statement from the guy" is from St. Cyril of Jerusalem's Catechetical Homilies, which was a series of sermons preached to prospective converts in the days leading up to Easter, when they would be baptized and brought into the church. They are a series of teachings on what the Christian faith is, not a promotion of personal opinions.

Anytime someone has to try and believe something will happen that GOD hasn't already told them about beforehand and provided the evidence of,..... that's just personal belief. That's not the same as faith.

God the Son did tell us beforehand that He would institute this sacrament.

In other words, even though you're not seeing it change, you're suppose to believe that it did. That doesn't sound like biblical faith.

Really? "Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." (Jn 20:29)

And later: "For we walk by faith, not by sight." (2 Cor. 5:7)

Here's a question: where in the Bible does it say that you're supposed to see the effects of a miracle to believe it?

 

[ARBITER01]

Here's a question: where in the Bible does it say that you're supposed to see the effects of a miracle to believe it?

Well if it doesn't happen,...... then it's not a miracle is it?

You can try and make yourself think it will against all odds, but if it doesn't happen, then obviously GOD wasn't involved in it, ie it wasn't a supernatural miracle.

That statement from the guy specifically said to keep believing even though you don't see it change with your eyes. Like I said, that doesn't sound like biblical faith.

 

[jas3]

Like I said, that doesn't sound like biblical faith.

And I'm asking you: where is your scripture to back that up?

 

[RileyG]

Yes, that's probably true. However, I'm not sure the question that the bread and the wine might get "transformed" was on the table either?? I don't suppose that anyone would've questioned that Jesus was "present" when he served up the Communion. And nobody would question whether his presence, via the Holy Spirit, is in the room whenever the Communion is served up either?

It’s a sacred mystery.

 

[ARBITER01]

And I'm asking you: where is your scripture to back that up?

The bible doesn't say that. Here is what it says faith is,....

Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Ok,.... what evidence do you have from GOD that what you hoped for is going to happen?

Your guy is wanting people to believe even through nothing happens,.... that's not biblical faith, that's just personal belief.

There is no evidence from GOD that anything will happen, so people are operating on personal belief, and from what I can tell, nothing has ever happened during one of these events, but yet you're just suppose to keep believing without results.

 

[jas3]

Here is what it says faith is,....

Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Ok,.... what evidence do you have from GOD that what you hoped for is going to happen?

As the passage from Hebrews says, faith is the evidence. The whole point is that God doesn't have to give us material evidence for us to believe (although Eucharistic miracles can and have happened where there is a visible transformation of the elements into flesh and blood). Faith - not just intellectual assent, but true faith - is a gift from God, and the fact that it has been given is evidence enough. That's what the passage in Hebrews is saying.

The demand for physical evidence is the same one that is made by atheists: where is the evidence that God answers any of your prayers? Where is the evidence that Jesus was resurrected rather than his body being hidden? Where is the evidence of the existence of heaven and hell? We know these things by faith, not by a forensic examination.

There is no evidence from GOD that anything will happen

"This is My body."

and from what I can tell, nothing has ever happened during one of these events

It has, search for "Eucharistic miracle" and you'll find examples.

but yet you're just suppose to keep believing without results.

That would be faith, yes. We keep believing in the bodily resurrection, even though as far as we've seen, dead people's bodies haven't been resurrected yet. This is what Paul means when he says we walk by faith, not by sight.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

That statement from the guy specifically said to keep believing even though you don't see it change with your eyes. Like I said, that doesn't sound like biblical faith.

One can see the crucifixion of Christ as an historical event via witness accounts. One can not see the Atonement as it is a supernatural event. Not seeing this event but believing by faith IS BIBLICAL FAITH.

 

[ARBITER01]

As the passage from Hebrews says, faith is the evidence. The whole point is that God doesn't have to give us material evidence for us to believe (although Eucharistic miracles can and have happened where there is a visible transformation of the elements into flesh and blood). Faith - not just intellectual assent, but true faith - is a gift from God, and the fact that it has been given is evidence enough. That's what the passage in Hebrews is saying.

The demand for physical evidence is the same one that is made by atheists: where is the evidence that God answers any of your prayers? Where is the evidence that Jesus was resurrected rather than his body being hidden? Where is the evidence of the existence of heaven and hell? We know these things by faith, not by a forensic examination.

You're correct in saying that faith is a gift from GOD. Without GOD giving you that faith first, ie telling you that it is going to happen, it is just a personal belief on your part,.... in other words you're living in your mind.

Faith has results. It did for Jesus, Peter, Paul, and others in scripture, so I'm in disagreement that anyone be told that they need to just keep going through the motions and believing and not seeing any results.

Your guy that wrote that statement I quoted makes it seem that he knew there would be no results from the actions. I don't call that faith.

 

[jas3]

Without GOD giving you that faith first, ie telling you that it is going to happen

That is not what faith is.

Faith has results.

So you keep saying, but that is not what the Bible says.

 

[ARBITER01]

That is not what faith is.

So you keep saying, but that is not what the Bible says.

I think the examples of faith in action, especially in Acts by our apostles, speak volumes of what faith is.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Did you have a born again "experience?"

If not, then I question how you would have faith without an answer from heaven.

Yes, my Baptism, when I was about 1 week old. I can not remember not having faith in Jesus Christ.