How Often Need Catholics Take Communion?

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
@ Weber Home:

Your thoughts on this subject are interesting. As a former Roman Catholic, I recall more teaching about the need for weekly Communion due to the sanctifying graces found there. We know that Communion is now offered on a daily basis in most RC churches. Perhaps we will witness the RCC offering Communion on an hourly basis, and this would be the continual treadmill of works that is spiritually exhausting.

The Wafer Warehouse will be overjoyed
 

God's Truth

New member
Well; one thing we can be very sure of is that Christ wasn't literal.The reason being that right after the Flood, God forbad humanity to eat living flesh and blood (Gen 9:3-4). So if people are determined to eat Christ's flesh and blood, either literally or transubstantiated, they are going to have to first make sure it's quite dead; which of course is impossible seeing as how Christ rose from the dead with immortality. (Rom 6:9)

So how do you eat Jesus flesh and drink his blood?
 

God's Truth

New member
Also; the night of Christ's last supper, he and all the men present with him were Jews. Well; seeing as how according to Heb 9:16-17, the new covenant wasn't ratified until Christ died, then he and his men were still under the jurisdiction of the covenant that Yhvh's people agreed upon with God in the Old Testament as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.



When Jesus walked the earth, he gave the commands, the conditions of the NEW COVENANT.
He also explained that his blood would be shed for the New Covenant.
 

God's Truth

New member
WeberHome,

I asked you HOW you eat Jesus' flesh and drink his blood, and you said you do not know...

JESUS SAYS that UNLESS YOU DO---you will not have life.

John 6:53 Jesus said to them, "Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
Usually to call Dennis, who was already in a bad mood. Wonder what causes that?
He should have hung on to Beth Davenport. She was a keeper.

I heard that Gretchen was the Hollywood's first choice to play "The Bionic Woman," a role eventually given to that overrated Lindsay Wagner chick. The only reason that Gretchen did not win, was cuz she did not like to bowl, go out in the sun, and was slower than Lindsay in slow motion. It's down right curious, if you ask me, Mayor...........
 

WeberHome

New member
I asked you HOW you eat Jesus' flesh and drink his blood, and you said you do not know... JESUS SAYS that UNLESS YOU DO--- you will not have life.
John 6:53 Jesus said to them, "Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.

In a nutshell: Rome regards its Eucharist as a form of nourishment. In other words; failure to eat Rome's Eucharist in a timely manner results in a sort of malnutrition which, in severe cases, results in spiritual death.

John 6:53 . . Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.

In that respect, Rome's Eucharist is a kind of manna; which the Jews had to gather and eat on a daily basis because one dose of manna wasn't sufficient to keep people alive for very long. And the manna itself was perishable. It spoiled in no time at all which is why the Jews had to gather it up fresh every day .

In contrast to manna; Christ isn't perishable; so people need not gather him fresh every day. And his nutrition is so powerful and lasting that people need not eat him on a daily basis.

John 6:49-51 . . Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died; this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever;

Rome's bread isn't a living bread. In point of fact, it's quite perishable; viz: it's nutrition isn't powerful and lasting. Were Rome's bread a living bread, Catholics would need to take it but once because according to John 6:54, the kind of life in living bread is eternal life; which is a kind of life that's impervious to age, death, and putrefaction.

Eternal life always was, it always is, and it always will be because eternal life is what kept God going in the past, it's what keeps God going in the now, and eternal life will keep God going in the future too because eternal life is a perpetual kind of life; viz: it's deathless.

According to 1John 1:1-2, Christ is eternal life; which is precisely why people obtain eternal life when they correctly partake of his body.

The possession of eternal life is an extremely crucial issue for Christians because according to God's testimony, as an unimpeachable expert witness in all matters pertaining to His son, Christians lacking eternal life also lack His son; viz: they are quite christless.

1John 5:11-12 . . This is what God has testified: He has given us eternal life, and this life is in His son. So whoever has God's son has this life; and whosoever does not have this life, does not have His son.

Christless Christians are in grave danger of the sum of all fears.

Rom 8:9 . . If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.

Q: What does that mean for Christians who hope to get eternal life after they pass away rather than now? Are they christless too?

A: Yes; unless of course God is a person of questionable integrity who cannot be trusted to always tell the truth.

1John 5:10 . . Whoever does not believe God has made Him a liar by not believing the testimony God has given about his Son.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 

God's Truth

New member
In a nutshell: Rome regards its Eucharist as a form of nourishment. In other words; failure to eat Rome's Eucharist in a timely manner results in a sort of malnutrition which, in severe cases, results in spiritual death.

I am not speaking about the Catholic's false understanding about eating Jesus' flesh. I am talking about what you think it means.
 

Cruciform

New member
No, that's the Roman Catholic teaching on the Eucharist.
Yes, someone has to interpret the Scriptures in an authoritative and binding manner. The question is whether it will be (1) Christ's one historic Church, or (2) CM's preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect. I'll go with the former ever time, thanks.

The Biblical teaching on communion can be found HERE.
"HERE" according to whose---what human being's---bindingly authoritative interpretation? Yours, right? Shocking.
 

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
Yes, someone has to interpret the Scriptures in an authoritative and binding manner. The question is whether it will be (1) Christ's one historic Church, or (2) CM's preferred recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect. I'll go with the former ever time, thanks.
Yes, the wisdom of man is so much comforting that walking with Christ. Good luck wit that.


"HERE" according to whose---what human being's---bindingly authoritative interpretation? Yours, right? Shocking.
Urm, maybe you missed this in all your history and catechism classes, but the Bible is God's Word, according to God. No humans, including the magisterims, is binding. Only God's word is binding.
 

Cruciform

New member
Yes, the wisdom of man is so much comforting that walking with Christ.
Merely a False Dilemma Fallacy on your part. Try again.

Urm, maybe you missed this in all your history and catechism classes, but the Bible is God's Word, according to God. No humans, including the magisterims, is binding. Only God's word is binding.
Urm, maybe you missed this in your glaring lack of history and catechism classes, but the New Testament documents were written by fallible men who were nevertheless enabled by God to teach infallibly and bindingly. Having been penned in human languages, those same documents must also be infallibly and bindingly interpreted by the same sort of men---apostles and bishops (i.e., the Magisterium)---who are enabled by God to do so. As in the beginning, so today.


Back to Post #37 above.
 
Top