Why Is The Eucharist Needed To Apply The Cross?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1226175' date='Apr 1 2007, 05:09 PM']T

One either has the Holy Spirit indwelling and are an adopted child of God or they are not.

its not a half way situation.

One can be seeking God and on the way to salvation and God does work on the Christian--process of santification.

But dont get justification and santification mixed up.

You are either born again or you are not.

You either are a Christian with the Holy Spirit indwelling or you are not.[/quote]
Yes, one either has the Holy Spirit indwelling or not, but one may not be completely open to the Holy Spirit, and if you deny that, you deny Scripture.

[Gene Church]

Budge,

I will pray for you. It is clear that you have no intention of learning the truth, only attacking the beliefs of others who have found the Truth. Your claims in no way reflect the understanding of the early Church. If you were truly interested in learning the Truth, you would listen. But forgetting what has been said by a great many (two ears, one mouth), you believe you have all the answers. So did Satan.

Jesus gave us the Church, and a leader for the Church. You set yourself as above all others, to judge. To an extent, you are right. Your free will allows you to be wrong, and to face the consequences. We too will face the consequences of our actions if we sit quietly and fail to defend the faith presented to us by our Lord Jesus Christ, through the Catholic Church.

The only conclusion I have reached about you is that you jump from site to site because you want to create dissention, not learn, or answer questions. That is sad. May God have pity on your soul.

Gene

[Mateo el Feo]

Budge, regarding the Sacrifice of the Mass (e.g. being "another sacrifice"), you write:[quote name='Budge' post='1226134' date='Apr 1 2007, 06:52 PM']You cant ignore the sacrifice on the cross, and say well Jesus instituted ANOTHER SACRIFICE before going to the cross, Hebrews makes that quite plain.
...
The Catholic Church by teaching the above keeps Jesus Christ on the cross forever.[/quote]Sounds like your mixing up your strawman arguments. Which is it: "another sacrifice before going to the cross" or "keep[ing] Jesus Christ on the cross forever"?

Re-read paragraphs 1362ff of the Catechism:

[url="http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2chpt1art3.htm#v"]http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2chpt1art3.htm#v[/url]

Especially, 1367. Please recall, as you read, your calumny (i.e. bearing false witness) is a sin against the Eighth Commandment. You know your strawmen are inaccurate representations of Catholic teachings, and they even contradict one another. Please refrain from using strawman arguments.

By the way, didn't you say you read the entire Catechism?

[quote name='Budge' post='1226134' date='Apr 1 2007, 06:52 PM']No, Jesus was speaking of going to the cross and of HIS SACRIFICE THERE. The Lord's Supper was instituted for its rememberance.[/quote]Thank you for the lesson in Budgianity. When you would like to learn about Christianity and our Holy Scriptures, let me know.

[quote name='Budge' post='1226134' date='Apr 1 2007, 06:52 PM']Against you are changing the subject, WHY IS THE EUCHARIST NEEDED TO APPLY THE CROSS? was the original question.[/quote]I didn't "change the subject". I responded to specific claims you made. I thought quoting them was sufficient to make that point obvious. As far as the question, "Why is the Eucharist needed?", the immediate answer is: because Our Lord commanded us, "Do this in memory of Me." It is a command He makes for our own benefit. For more discussion, please read:

[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Institution_of_the_Mass.asp"]http://www.catholic.com/library/Institution_of_the_Mass.asp[/url]

[quote name='Budge' post='1226134' date='Apr 1 2007, 06:52 PM']Christ is NOT STILL SACRIFICING, His work on the CROSS was FINISHED and He said IT IS FINISHED, or really in the GREEK--DEBT PAID IN FULL[/quote]I linked to the Catechism. Please read it.

[quote name='Budge' post='1226134' date='Apr 1 2007, 06:52 PM']Christians recieve Christ via Faith, salvation via FAITH, one time,[/quote]So OSAS?

[quote name='Budge' post='1226134' date='Apr 1 2007, 06:52 PM']Catholics have to go back for repeated "fill-ups" week after week.[/quote]You really make some silly statements Budge. Just curious, Budge, is the Holy Spirit done working in you? Why or why not?

[quote name='Budge' post='1226134' date='Apr 1 2007, 06:52 PM']When Catholics tell me that the cross is "outside time and space" and is NOT finished contrary to what Jesus said, then essentially Jesus is being offered again and again..>Else why the necessity for THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.[/quote]I didn't say the Cross is outside of time. I said that the Our Lord's Sacrifice is outside of time. Heck, you already know that its effects reach across time. Or are you saying that Our Lord's Sacrifice only applies to those who were alive 2,000 years ago?

[quote name='Budge' post='1226134' date='Apr 1 2007, 06:52 PM']No one has answered the main question of this thread either...
Jesus does not mean carnal eating, but spiritual eating. I have posted that one thread I did about where in the OT, the idea of EATING GODS WORD {ingesting it inside of you spiritually} is repeated over and over. This is not based on CARNAL eating, Jesus preached against CARNALeating when he said this.[/quote]When did carnal and spiritual eating become the main question of the thread? Anyway, this is Budgianity, not Christianity. You've got an uphill battle if you choose to go against 2,000 years of Christianity with your (wo)man-made novelties.

[quote name='Budge' post='1226134' date='Apr 1 2007, 06:52 PM']I believe that the Catholic Eucharist, denies the sufficiency of the cross, denies the true gospel where Jesus paid the debt in FULL, denies what it means to come to salvation in FAITH rather then via sacrament and falsely teaches that their "bloodless sacrifice" can add anything to the work Christ did on the cross.[/quote]I could claim the same thing about a protestant who says that the magic encantation, "I accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior" as a means to salvation. That protestant "denies the sufficiency of the cross, denies the true gospel where Jesus paid the debt in FULL." So do you deny "the sufficiency of the cross"?

[quote name='Budge' post='1226134' date='Apr 1 2007, 06:52 PM']It also has the interesting effect of denying the place of the Holy Spirit in the Christian's life because if you can receive God's grace via a wafer, what role does the Holy Spirit have to play in your life?[/quote]Again, you are looking like a tritheist. Catholics don't have faith in a "wafer." We have faith in the Holy Eucharist, which is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord, Jesus Christ.

In the hopes of encouraging you to reject your tritheistic tendancies, let me explain something about the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the perfect Love of the Father and the Son. As Our Lord's eternal sacrifice to His Father is the most obvious expression of Love for His Father, the Holy Spirit is clearly present in the Sacrifice of the Mass.

Pope John Paul II, in a 1989 homily entitled [url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19890913en.html"]"The Intrinsic Link between the Eucharist and the Gift of the Holy Spirit" (link)[/url], answers your question in greater detail.

Let me finish by answering one of your first questions with another question. You ask, "May I ask HOW we can, at our own will, DO anything, other than just accept the GIFT handed to us?" OK, let me respond by asking, "How can we even accept the GIFT handed to us without grace?"

Edited April 2, 2007 by Mateo el Feo

[TotusTuusMaria]

[center]J.M.J.[/center]
To understand God's basic plan for Salvation one simply cannot look at a few verses from the NT, Budge. One has to look at the OT as well specifically Exodus. Exodus gives us the blueprint of our salvation. (see St. Paul in 1 Cor. 10:1-13 where he gives an excellent guide on how to read Exodus and Numbers.)

Exodus is basic plan for how God will save us and the basic plan upon which the Church instituted by Christ is built. Exodus outlines in a veiled manner the history of our redemption wrought by Christ.

The basic parallelism of the types may be summed up as follows: as Moses led the Israelites from captivity in Egypt, through the Red Sea to a new life as God's redeemed, and from the sea to the promised land, directed by a pillar of fire, fed by miraculous bread (manna) and miraculous meat (qual) and water from a rock.... so Christ, the new Moses, the paschal lamb, sacrificed on Mt. Calvary, leads his Chosen People through the Red Sea of his redeeming Blood, by baptism, to the new Christian life in which, leading the life of the resurrected Christ, the redeemed follow Christ, the light of the world, through this life as a desert, [b]eating his flesh[/b], [b]drinking his blood[/b] until they ascend with him into the Promised Land, the kingdom of heaven.

God's plan is right there! By Baptism we are initiated into a new life, like that of the Chosen People in the Old Covenant who were led into a new life by the Red Sea. Like the Chosen People of the Old Covenant we too are being led to the promised land. We were saved from slavery of sin and death through the sacrifice on Calvary, yes, but so was the Chosen People saved from Egyptian slavery by the sacrifice of the paschal lamb whose bones were not broken and [b]whose flesh was eaten[/b], and it's blood was smeared on the outside of their house above the doorposts. The Chosen People of the New Law (see 1 Pet. 2:8) are guided by the pillar of fire with in us, the Holy Spirit. [b]Then God made a covenant with His Chosen People on Mt. Sinai. This covenant was the central event in the lives of the Israelites. Since God rescued the Israelites from Egypt, there was a special relationship between them and God, and this relationship was cemented with the covenant. Because of this covenant God would be with them, take care of them, guide, and give them their own country. They in turn would have to recognize their dependence upon him and obey his laws.[/b] We in the New Covenant are the same. On Mt. Calvary Christ, through His Blood sacrifice, sealed the New Covenant with His Chosen People. We were freed from slavery of sin and death, and we in turn had to depend upon him and obey his laws. (See Ex. 19:4-6)

The covenant was the central part in the lives of the Chosen People. It was ratafied around an altar on which young bulls were sacrificed. Moses splashed half of the blood, drawn from the bulls, upon the altar (representing God) and half upon the people, saying, "THis is the blood of the Covenant that Yahweh has made with you" (Ex. 24:8) [b] sound firmiluar?[/b]. This action signified the Israelites commitment of themselves to God and their close union with him. [b] In order that the people would never forget how God saved them and how much he loved them, he commanded them to celebrate a Passover ritual every year. In this celebration, they would RELIVE the passover and RENEW the covenant in their lives. God was not saving them from slavery over again, but they as a people were reliving and renewing the passover (as we, the Chosen People, relive and renew and take part in the "pass-over" of Christ, his sacrifice on Calvary. He is the paschal lamb is he not?

The new covenant, should be the central part of our lives. We are called by Christ to relive and renew the covenant just as the Chosen People of the Old Law did. Our covenant was sealed at Calvary, and we seal it forever more in the unbloody Holy Sacrifice of the Mass were we relive and renew the Sacrifice of Calvary. Christ is not being sacificed again. It is the SAME sacrifice. The Passover meal and celebration was a commemoration, a memorial service of the great Exodus event in their history. This Passover celebration, however, was not a reference merely to the past -what God had done; but also to the present - what God wants to do now and to the future - what God will do. It meant not only celebrating what God had done in the past: it also meant bringing the Exodus to the present, in the sense of re-living, re-experiencing, re-newing it, making it happen all over in their own lives. It was for this reason that the Israelites had their annual commemoration serve held to the same meal and celebration of the first Passover service. By taking part in this annual commemortaion, every Jew of every generation identified himself with the community God rescued from Egypt and with which he made the covenant. By this participation, he was considered a member of God's Chosen People. Without taking part in this paschal celbration, he would not be inseriting himself into the paschal mysetery and thereby would not be worhty to share in the blessing of the covenant (whoever does not eat the flesh man does not have life with in him or one must eat of my body and blood to merit eternal life... do those ring a bell?)[/b] We, by the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass do just what the people of the Old Covenant did! God commanded the people of the Old Law to relive the passover, just as he commanded us at the Last Supper to relive the paschal mystery of the New Law.

"It was before the festival of the Passover, and Jesus knew that the hour had come for him to pass from this world to the Father. He had always loved those who were his in the world, but now he showed how perfect his love was" (Jn. 13:1). And so, taking the bread and wine of the Passover meal, he said to his disciples: "I have longed to eat this passover with you before I suffer" (Lk. 22:15). There is so much similarity between the Jewish Passover meal and the Last Supper, the Eucharist (the new Passover meal): recounting the events of God's love for his people, the lamb (Christ is the Lamb), shedding of its blood (his blood), eating of its flesh (his flesh), drinking of the wine (his blood), giving thanks for God's goodness (Eucharist means thanksgiving). At the Passover celebration, the father recounted the events and meaning behind the annual celebration of the Passover. The joyful singing of those present signified that what they were celebrating took place not only for the Jews of the past, but that they were and are a part of it. During the Eucharist, the prayers, readings, and homily recount to us the events and meaning of Calvary and the Resurrection. Our joyful singing and participation in the Eucharist remind us that we also share in, and are incorporated in Christ's sacrifice and "passover." For the Jews, to participate in and to eat of the Passover meal was to share in that reality. For us, to participate in the Mass and to receive Communion is to share in this reality. [b] Thus we see the reason for taking part in the Mass and for receiving Holy Communion. [/b] Jesus said: "I tell you most solemnly, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you will not have life in you" (Jn. 6:53).

[b]God wanted the Israelites to celebrate the Passover so that they would never forget what he had done for them. Christ wants us to celebrate the Eucharist, so that we would never forget what Christ has done for us: "Do this in a memorial of me" (1 Cor. 11:25).

At the Last Supper Jesus said: "From now on, I tell you, I shall not drink wine until the day I drink the new wine with you in the kingdom of my Father" (Mt. 26:29). The Passover meal made the Israelites look to the future salvation; the Eucharist makes us look to the future when our salvation will be completed. [/b]

Every year Christ celebrated the paschal rite. However, when he celebrated the Passover for the last time on Holy Thursday, he gave the command: "Do this [i]in memory of me"[/i]; in other words, "celebrate the Passover no longer in memory of what God did for you in the past, but [i]in memory of what I am doing for you today and will do for you tomorrow on Calvary."[/i] The Eucharist makes present the new Passover, our deliverance from the slavery of sin and death, through the sacrifice and blood of the Lamb of God.

[b][i] The new covenant, perpetuarted and made present in the Eucharist, is for us the very center of our lives, the basis of our faith, and the basis of our very existence as a People of God. We become sharers in the covenant when, in Baptism, we are made one with Christ. In every Eucharist we can publicaly proclaim our acceptance of the covenant. In every Eucharist we can renew our personal ratification of the ceovenant and seal it with the sacrifices of our daily life. In every Eucharist we can tell Christ that we want him as our Lord and Savior and that we will be faithful to him. [/i][/b]

In Exodus, the blueprint of our salvation is layed out. And at the end of this blue print God came to dwell with the Chosen people in the Ark (Tabernacle). The Jewish people believed God to be TRULY present in the Ark. After Jesus' death though "the curtain of the sanctuary was torn in two from top to bottom" (Mk. 15:38). The temple of Jerusalem was the symbol of God's presence among his people. The tearing of the curtain symbolised the departure of God drom the temple. The Old Testament sacrifices came to an end; the new sacrifice is the sacrifice of Calvary, renewed and re-presented (NOT re-sacrificed IT IS NOT A DIFFERENT SACRIFICE) in an unbloody manner in the Eucharist. The Old Testament sanctuary came to an end; the new temple of God's presence on eath is in His Body, the Church. And He lives TRULY in the tabernacle in the Eucharist. The Old Covenant gave way to the New Covenant.

Jesus did not come to do away with the Old Law, but to fulfill it. There is a new covenant now!

All this sums up the reason why we celebrate the Eucharist. There is a great book called: Understanding the Mass by Rev. Maynard Kolodziej, O.F.M. if you have any more questions or are more interested about the Mass.

May God love you Budge!

God bless you!

In Jesus and Mary,
Marie

[TotusTuusMaria]

[center]J.M.J.[/center]

Jesus established the New Law at the Last Supper. He ratified it on Calvary. They are connected, Budge, they are.

The Mass is a commemoration, renewal, and representation of the Last Supper and Calvary. At the Last Supper, Christ expressed his obedience to the Father's will for him- death- by the double consecration of bread and wine, standing for the seeming separation of body and blood. On the following day, he surrendered to the Father's will by dying on the cross. His death is a fact of the past, but his salvific act is eternal, continuing in the Mass.

May God bless and keep you always!

In Jesus and Mary,
Marie

[Budge]

[quote]If you were truly interested in learning the Truth, you would listen. But forgetting what has been said by a great many (two ears, one mouth), you believe you have all the answers. So did Satan.[/quote]No we listen to different authorities.

I to Gods Word.

You to the Catholic Magisterium.

[quote]

Jesus gave us the Church, and a leader for the Church. You set yourself as above all others, to judge. To an extent, you are right. Your free will allows you to be wrong, and to face the consequences. We too will face the consequences of our actions if we sit quietly and fail to defend the faith presented to us by our Lord Jesus Christ, through the Catholic Church.[/quote]

Sure, obviously ONE of us is wrong and will be facing the music so to speak.
[quote]
The only conclusion I have reached about you is that you jump from site to site because you want to create dissention, not learn, or answer questions. That is sad. May God have pity on your soul.[/quote]I have spent years studying Catholicism, why would I want to learn from a false religion and depart from truth in Gods Word?
[quote]
Especially, 1367. Please recall, as you read, your calumny (i.e. bearing false witness) is a sin against the Eighth Commandment. You know your strawmen are inaccurate representations of Catholic teachings, and they even contradict one another. Please refrain from using strawman arguments.[/quote]

The Mass is considered a "Bloodless sacrifice" is it not?

Now I know they teach it is the SAME sacrifice being represneted but that goes back to my first quesiton here.

WY IS THE EUCHARIST NEED TO APPLY THE CROSS, and truly no one has answered it yet.

[quote]By the way, didn't you say you read the entire Catechism?[/quote]

Yes and I DO NOT AGREE WITH IT including the following reasoning...

367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: [b]"The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different.[/b]" "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."

Where in the BIble does CHrist institute having HIs sacrifice on the cross CONTINUED, lets say "REPRESENTED" by a priest class?

[i]No, Jesus was speaking of going to the cross and of HIS SACRIFICE THERE. The Lord's Supper was instituted for its rememberance.
Thank you for the lesson in Budgianity. When you would like to learn about Christianity and our Holy Scriptures, let me know.[/i]


I just pointed out that Christ's sacrifice was on the cross, and you DONT AGREE?



[i]"Why is the Eucharist needed?", the immediate answer is: because Our Lord commanded us, "Do this in memory of Me." It is a command He makes for our own benefit. For more discussion, please read:[/i]


Do this in MEMORY of me.

That is what it is supposed to be for. Not a representation of the original sacrifice that is a middle man ritual necessary for God's "grace".

[i]
You really make some silly statements Budge. Just curious, Budge, is the Holy Spirit done working in you? Why or why not?[/i]

No the Holy Spirit has more work to be done.

But DONT MIX UP JUSTIFICATION WITH SANTIFICATION!

[i]
I said that the Our Lord's Sacrifice is outside of time. Heck, you already know that its effects reach across time. Or are you saying that Our Lord's Sacrifice only applies to those who were alive 2,000 years ago?[/i]


No it was done within TIME, and it forgave, present, past and future sins, Jesus said IT IS FINISHED, not IT WILL BE CONTINUING OUTSIDE OF TIME. Dont you realize that if His sacrifice on the cross is STILL going on, in a way JESUS IS STILL ON THE CROSS and that is simply NOT true.

You know in a way you folks deny the incarnation when you play these magic tricks with time.
cross.
[i]I could claim the same thing about a protestant who says that the magic encantation, "I accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior" as a means to salvation. That protestant "denies the sufficiency of the cross, denies the true gospel where Jesus paid the debt in FULL." So do you deny "the sufficiency of the cross"?[/i]


The words themself dont save you. If ones faith is not sincere and there is no change inside--ie no HOly Spirit coming to dwell within you, you are NOT SAVED.

Faith and accepting Jesus Christ as savior is not denying the sufficiency of the cross but embracing it knowing your salvation is ALL DEPENDANT ON HIM!
[i]
Again, you are looking like a tritheist. Catholics don't have faith in a "wafer." We have faith in the Holy Eucharist, which is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord, Jesus Christ.[/i]

You have been led to have faith in a piece of bread.

The Eucharist in many ways is a sacrament that seeks to obliterate the role the Holy Spirit plays in a Christian life.


[i]
In the hopes of encouraging you to reject your tritheistic tendancies, let me explain something about the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the perfect Love of the Father and the Son. As Our Lord's eternal sacrifice to His Father is the most obvious expression of Love for His Father, [u]the Holy Spirit is clearly present in the Sacrifice of the Mass[/u].[/i]

Where? Honestly find something official and post it here.

The Holy Spirit is present indwelling in Christians. Why dont Catholcis emphasize that?

To be honest I see the Holy Spirit surplanted in Catholicism via its sacraments being the purveyor of grace instead.

[i]
You ask, "May I ask HOW we can, at our own will, DO anything, other than just accept the GIFT handed to us?" OK, let me respond by asking, "How can we even accept the GIFT handed to us without grace?"[/i]


When do Catholics accept the gift of salvation.?

I keep seeing Catholics here write that they were saved at infant baptism.

Considering that babies cant think yet on religion even, how does that work?

[i]
To understand God's basic plan for Salvation one simply cannot look at a few verses from the NT, Budge. One has to look at the OT as well specifically Exodus. Exodus gives us the blueprint of our salvation. (see St. Paul in 1 Cor. 10:1-13 where he gives an excellent guide on how to read Exodus and Numbers.)[/i]
Sure the OT interprets the NT and vice versa.

You are partially right about the Exodus, the manna was a precursor of PASSOVER {our salvation under the blood of CHrist} and unleavened bread that had stripes on it....{mahtzo} like Jesus had stripes put on Him via the crucifixiction.

but the Catholic Eucharist departs from these Biblical truths and denies that the true living bread is Jesus Christ, they think it means turning "bread" into "jesus".

You do know that in the OT, Jews are FORBIDDEN to drink blood.

So be make sure you read even mroe carefully. The new covenant was TO END sacrifices and that includes Romes sacriices on its altar, as I wrote in the first part of this thread, read Hebrews 10.


Here is something for you to read Totus:

[url="http://www.justforcatholics.org/a11.htm"]http://www.justforcatholics.org/a11.htm[/url]

Totus, Jesus blood was poured out on the cross, it is not in Rome's chalices today.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Budge' post='1227093' date='Apr 2 2007, 05:55 PM']The Holy Spirit is present indwelling in Christians.[/quote]

I don't really think people would argue with that one. We recognize the Holy Spirit moving in us, working in us, and also recognize that same Holy Spirit present in the Mass.

[quote name='Budge' post='1227093' date='Apr 2 2007, 05:55 PM']You do know that in the OT, Jews are FORBIDDEN to drink blood.[/quote]
The interesting thing is [b]why [/b]they were forbidden to drink the blood, or eat meat with the blood in it still. Deuteronomy 12:23: "Only be sure not to eat the blood, for the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh". They weren't to eat the blood because it is the life of the animal. Notice what Jesus says in John 6:53-4: "So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day." So Jesus makes the connection here.

Also, if you're going to use this argument, then it also wouldn't make sense for any of us to eat pork now, even though Jesus specifically told Peter to eat "unclean" items in Acts.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Budge' post='1227093' date='Apr 2 2007, 12:55 PM']WY IS THE EUCHARIST NEED TO APPLY THE CROSS, and truly no one has answered it yet.[/quote]We answered the question. You just disagree, because you follow a man-made tradition.

[quote name='Budge' post='1227093' date='Apr 2 2007, 12:55 PM']Do this in MEMORY of me.

That is what it is supposed to be for. Not a representation of the original sacrifice that is a middle man ritual necessary for God's "grace".[/quote]Budge, this "man-made ritual" predates Holy Scriptures. How could you claim that the Church is able to authoritatively compile Holy Scriptures, yet unable to authoritatively speak on its own rituals. The Church pre-dates the Holy Bible. How many times must we remind you what the "pillar and foundation of Truth" is?

[quote name='Budge' post='1227093' date='Apr 2 2007, 12:55 PM'][i]You really make some silly statements Budge. Just curious, Budge, is the Holy Spirit done working in you? Why or why not?[/i]

No the Holy Spirit has more work to be done.

But DONT MIX UP JUSTIFICATION WITH SANTIFICATION![/quote]Either way, you've got to get "fill-ups." So why complain to us, if Budgianity is no different from the complaints you have against Christianity?

[quote name='Budge' post='1227093' date='Apr 2 2007, 12:55 PM']You know in a way you folks deny the incarnation when you play these magic tricks with time.[/quote]Now, that's a strange accusation. There's no "magic tricks" about the fact the the Son offers Himself to His Father outside of time. Otherwise, you fall into the "changing god" problem. Just to be sure, I'll ask: in Budgianity, does the relationship between God the Son and God the Father change over time?

[quote name='Budge' post='1227093' date='Apr 2 2007, 12:55 PM'][[i]I could claim the same thing about a protestant who says that the magic encantation, "I accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior" as a means to salvation. That protestant "denies the sufficiency of the cross, denies the true gospel where Jesus paid the debt in FULL." So do you deny "the sufficiency of the cross"?[/i]
The words themself dont save you. If ones faith is not sincere and there is no change inside--ie no HOly Spirit coming to dwell within you, you are NOT SAVED.[/quote]So Our Lord's sacrifice is insufficient, according to Budgianity?

[quote name='Budge' post='1227093' date='Apr 2 2007, 12:55 PM']You have been led to have faith in a piece of bread.[/quote]I have been led by Our Lord's own words, contained in the Holy Bible. You have been led by 16th century innovators divorced from authentic Christianity.

[quote name='Budge' post='1227093' date='Apr 2 2007, 12:55 PM'][i]The Holy Spirit proceeds from the perfect Love of the Father and the Son. As Our Lord's eternal sacrifice to His Father is the most obvious expression of Love for His Father, [u]the Holy Spirit is clearly present in the Sacrifice of the Mass[/u].[/i]

Where? Honestly find something official and post it here.[/quote]I provided a link.

[quote name='Budge' post='1227093' date='Apr 2 2007, 12:55 PM']The Holy Spirit is present indwelling in Christians. Why dont Catholcis emphasize that?[/quote]Catholics believe that Confirmation marks the soul, allowing the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is such a significant event, that it is considered a Sacrament. Reformers rejected the significance, and downgraded or outright rejected Confirmation. So, I think the fact that Confirmation is one of the seven sacraments gives a significant emphasis to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Here's the section on Confirmation from the Catechism:
[url="http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2chpt1art2.htm"]http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2chpt1art2.htm[/url]

Here's the section on the Holy Spirit:
[url="http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt3art8.htm"]http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt3art8.htm[/url]

Budge writes, [b]"To be honest I see the Holy Spirit surplanted in Catholicism via its sacraments being the purveyor of grace instead."[/b]
That's from a perspective that denies God's ability to channel His grace through men. Neither the Holy Bible nor Christianity would accept such a position. Would you accuse the Apostles of supplanting the Holy Spirit?[quote name='Acts 8:14-17']Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit; for it had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.[/quote]

Budge writes, [b]"I keep seeing Catholics here write that they were saved at infant baptism."[/b]
I'd like to see the quotes of the Catholics who you are describing. Quoting the Catechism, "The Most Holy Trinity gives the baptized sanctifying grace, the grace of justification." (Paragraph 1266) We are saved when we "finish the race", as St. Paul writes.

Budge writes, [b]"Considering that babies cant think yet on religion even, how does that work?"[/b]
The same way that circumcision worked. Eight day old babies were brought into the Old Covenant, before they could "think yet on religion."

Edited April 2, 2007 by Mateo el Feo

[Romans1513]

[quote name='Budge']No we listen to different authorities.

I to Gods Word.

You to the Catholic Magisterium.[/quote]



I'm just going to repreat my post, because I didn't get a response and I'm curious. Thanks.

[quote name='Romans1513' post='1225761' date='Apr 1 2007, 03:40 PM']I don't usually reply to you, Budge, because other people seem to take care of it, and I'm no expert. But this one seems really easy:

Because Jesus told us to.

John 6
53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

(KJV, just for you Budge )[/quote]

[cathoholic_anonymous]

[quote]Catholics have to go back for repeated "fill-ups" week after week.[/quote]

My mother showed how much she loved me when she kissed and cuddled me an hour after my birth.

That doesn't mean that I should never accept a kiss or a hug from her again, even though she has nothing more to prove to me. The more intimate you are with Jesus, the more you love Him, the more you want Him. I don't receive Holy Communion every Sunday because I am like a car with an empty fuel tank, but because I love my God and He loves me. As St Therese of Lisieux wrote, Communion is like 'the kiss of Christ'.

Edited April 2, 2007 by Cathoholic Anonymous

[Budge]

[quote]e more intimate you are with Jesus, the more you love Him, the more you want Him. I don't receive Holy Communion every Sunday because I am like a car with an empty fuel tank, but because I love my God and He loves me. As St Therese of Lisieux wrote, Communion is like 'the kiss of Christ'.[/quote]

Since when.... do we "love" others by literally taking a chomp out of them?

[img]http://www.offthemarkcartoons.com/cartoons/1998-03-26.gif[/img]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1227344' date='Apr 2 2007, 03:32 PM']Since when.... do we "love" others by literally taking a chomp out of them?

[img]http://www.offthemarkcartoons.com/cartoons/1998-03-26.gif[/img][/quote]
Once again, Budge, you know what Catholicism teaches, but you choose your own faulty characterization over that. We don't chomp bits out of Jesus. You know that's not true and you know it's not what we believe. Be honest about what we believe.

Edited to add: Budge, you have again ignored my posts. That's not a debate. Respond to them, please.

[Budge]

[quote] You know that's not true and you know it's not what we believe. Be honest about what we believe[/quote]Are you repeating what this priest says?

You cant say that someone is eating and drinking the body and blood of Christ and then at the same time say they are NOT.

[quote] Quote:[b]Do we really eat His flesh?[/b]
We believe that tthe Eucharist is the [b]body, blood,[/b] soul, and divinity of Christ. When we recieve Christ in the Eucharist, [b]we believe we are eating and drinking the body and blood of Christ. [/b]I have always thought that this meant that we are eating his real flesh and drinking his real blood, under the appearances or bread and wine. I am told, however that this is wrong. I am told that rather that eating his real flesh and drinking his real blood, we are eating and drinking the sacramental Jesus. What exactly does this mean? What is the "sacremental" felsh and blood that we are receiving? In other words, if I tell a non-Catholic "oh no, we don't really eat the real flesh and drink the real blood of Christ, we only eat and drink the Sacremental Christ." What am I saying? What does this mean? Thank you.
__________________
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself not discerning the body of the Lord

1Corinthians 11:29
St.Eric
View Public Profile
Send a private message to St.Eric
Find all posts by St.Eric
#2
Old Today, 10:28 am
Fr. Vincent Serpa Fr. Vincent Serpa is online now
Catholic Answers Apologist

Join Date: May 4, 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,478
Default Re: Do we really eat the flesh?
Hi,

I just answered a similar question. But you seem to want to go deeper. To go deeper, however, is to enter into a mystery that is divine. All we know is that Jesus insisted in the necessity of eating His flesh and drinking His blood. This the Apostles did at the Last Supper. They obviously were not trying to consume His body as He physically sat in their presence.[u][b] They consumed His flesh and blood under the appearances of bread and wine. When we say that they sacramentally consumed His body and blood, we clearly understand what they were NOT doing. No one was nawing on any part of His physical person. Yet by His own statement, they were receiving His body and blood.[/b][/u]

A sacrament is a sign instituted by Christ that actually makes present the grace that it signifies. Baptism not only symbolizes a washing or cleansing, it actually IS a cleansing (of original sin). [b]The Eucharist not only symbolizes Christ’s body and blood, it actually IS the His body and blood. [/b]But it is a mystery which defies our present ability to fully understand. We simply take the Lord at His word as His Apostles and early Church did.

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.[/quote]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1227362' date='Apr 2 2007, 03:41 PM']Are you repeating what this priest says?

You cant say that someone is eating and drinking the body and blood of Christ and then at the same time say they are NOT.[/quote]
No, of course not, that would be a mindless contradiction. I can say, however, in what manner they are eating and drinking the Body and Blood of Christ. Since we are not eating the Body and Blood of Christ in a local manner (that is, we don't pull His Body down out of heaven and start gnawing on it), but in a sacramental manner (His "local" body, that is, the physical, historical body which is enthroned in heaven, remains in heaven, but the substance of His Body, His very Being, is multiplied similarly to how He multiplied loaves and fishes). Let's say that Jesus takes a loaf of bread and multiplies it into these nice big loaves. Let's also say that each loaf actually is, in substance, the same loaf as the first...it is somehow mystically the same, yet it exists in a different locality. Now, if you eat that loaf, are you eat one of the multiplied loaves while Jesus is holding the original loaf, do chunks start disappearing from the original loaf? No, of course not. Is the original loaf damaged in any way? No, of course not. Does the original loaf move? No, of course not. Yet, at the same time, you are consuming the original loaf in a mystical way by consuming the substance and essence, the very being of the other loaf (because the loaf, while actually in one place, is being presented in another by means of God's grace). This metaphor ultimately fails to grasp the depths of the Eucharist because the Eucharist is a mystery (mysteries can be shown not to be illogical, but their logic cannot be explained), but it illustrates an important point. What I said in the parentheses about mysteries is clear from the theology of the early Church. With regard to the Trinity, for instance, we cannot explain what exactly the Trinity is, but we clearly can explain what the Trinity is not, and we can show how the Trinity is not a contradiction. In that way, we understand mysteries in a negative way...God provides us with enough understanding to see that they are not against reason, but not so much understanding that we are in a position to know rather than to believe.

Catholics aren't cannibals. Jesus is sacramentally present in our Eucharist. We can't explain exactly how, but we can explain how not. He is not present in such a way that we are taking bites out of His local body.

[Mateo el Feo]

Pagan Rome persecuted Christians, in part because they had misunderstandings about the Christian belief regarding the Eucharist. Budge's accusations against Christianity are no different than the pagans 2,000 years ago.