hello-- recently i asked someone i know his opinion on the mormon and catholic churches....

first, some background. i am a lapsed catholic and im searching. for what, im not sure-- truth, reason, divine inspiration, who knows. when i attend church (which is rare), i DO go to a catholic church, and i genuflect (ALL the way down, no half-knee business) and try to find something meaningful in the Mass, whether its from the gospel, or during the "transubstantiation". generally, though, i have fits of agnosticism, or i doubt the reasoning of the Catholic Church, and ive even despised christians who are vocal in the media.

my friend is a graduate of a bible school in maine. he is knowledgable of many christian sects, knows theology and philosophy, and claims to have spoken "in tongues", and says he has been touched by the Holy Spirit. He also claims he saw Christ for but an instant, in the hallway outside the school's chapel. What followed THAT was a bout of speaking in tongues, and his fellow students engaging in an all-night prayer fest in the hallway....i went to a catholic school for 12 years, and could only DREAM of experiencing the Holy Spirit either personally or with the love and prayers of schoolmates.

anyway...does he think the Catholic Church is valid? in response to my questions, he says:

that the Eucharist is actually a pagan tradition, and one of a number of pagan traditions that were incorporated into christianity,

its "not scriptural",

that there is no basis for "transubstantiation", meaning that it's LITERALLY the body and blood of Christ is ridiculous,

it was incorporated a LONG while after the fledgling church came into being, again, because of pagan tradition....

i countered that it IS scriptural, there is no doubt Jesus said "take my body and blood....", as its plainly stated in the Bible. also, after thinking about this for a day or two, i would say "so what" if it has semblance to something pagans did. loosely tied coincidence, right?

any help out there? please, none of "if you believe it with all your heart" stuff. i need facts or scriptural references. please-- im in despair now, and if i cant resolve THIS issue, i think my heart wont allow me to continue fighting to find (RE-find) the faith i grew up with. thanks, and sorry this is so long.

-- jason (jas_r_22@hotmail.com), January 06, 2004

Answers

Hi Jason, Not only is it scriptural, but we have these writings from the Church Fathers proving beyond a doubt that the practice and the belief of the Eucharist date all the way back to 1st generation Christianity.

"For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour,having been made flesh and blood for our salvation,so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word,and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished,is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." Justin Martyr,First Apology,66(A.D. 110-165),in ANF,I:185

"He acknowledged the cup (which is a part of the creation) as his own blood,from which he bedews our blood; and the bread (also a part of creation) he affirmed to be his own body,from which he gives increase to our bodies." Irenaeus,Against Heresies,V:2,2(c.A.D. 200),in NE,119

"Then, having taken the bread and given it to His disciples, He made it His own body, by saying, 'This is my body,' that is, the figure of my body. A figure, however, there could not have been, unless there were first a veritable body. An empty thing, or phantom, is incapable of a figure. If, however, (as Marcion might say,) He pretended the bread was His body, because He lacked the truth of bodily substance, it follows that He must have given bread for us. It would contribute very well to the support of Marcion's theory of a phantom body, that bread should have been crucified! But why call His body bread, and not rather (some other edible thing, say) a melon, which Marcion must have had in lieu of a heart! He did not understand how ancient was this figure of the body of Christ, who said Himself by Jeremiah: 'I was like a lamb or an ox that is brought to the slaughter, and I knew not that they devised a device against me, saying, Let us cast the tree upon His bread,' which means, of course, the cross upon His body. And thus, casting light, as He always did, upon the ancient prophecies, He declared plainly enough what He meant by the bread, when He called the bread His own body. He likewise, when mentioning the cup and making the new testament to be sealed 'in His blood,' affirms the reality of His body. For no blood can belong to a body which is not a body of flesh. If any sort of body were presented to our view, which is not one of flesh, not being fleshly, it would not possess blood. Thus, from the evidence of the flesh, we get a proof of the body, and a proof of the flesh from the evidence of the blood. In order, however, that you may discover how anciently wine is used as a figure for blood, turn to Isaiah, who asks, 'Who is this that cometh from Edom, from Bosor with garments dyed in red, so glorious in His apparel, in the greatness of his might? Why are thy garments red, and thy raiment as his who cometh from the treading of the full winepress?' The prophetic Spirit contemplates the Lord as if He were already on His way to His passion, clad in His fleshly nature; and as He was to suffer therein, He represents the bleeding condition of His flesh under the metaphor of garments dyed in red, as if reddened in the treading and crushing process of the wine-press, from which the labourers descend reddened with the wine-juice, like men stained in blood. Much more clearly still does the book of Genesis foretell this, when (in the blessing of Judah, out of whose tribe Christ was to come according to the flesh) it even then delineated Christ in the person of that patriarch, saying, 'He washed His garments in wine, and His clothes in the blood of grapes'--in His garments and clothes the prophecy pointed out his flesh, and His blood in the wine. Thus did He now consecrate His blood in wine, who then (by the patriarch) used the figure of wine to describe His blood." Tertullian,Against Marcion,40(A.D. 212),in ANF,III:418-419

"He once in Cana of Galilee, turned the water into wine, akin to blood, and is it incredible that He should have turned wine into blood?" Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,XXII:4(c.A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:152

"Having learn these things, and been fully assured that the seeming bread is not bread, though sensible to taste, but the Body of Christ; and that the seeming wine is not wine, though the taste will have it so, but the Blood of Christ; and that of this David sung of old, saying, And bread strengtheneth man's heart, to make his face to shine with oil, 'strengthen thou thine heart,' by partaking thereof as spiritual, and "make the face of thy soul to shine." " Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,XXII:8(c.A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:152

"Then having sanctified ourselves by these spiritual Hymns, we beseech the merciful God to send forth His Holy Spirit upon the gifts lying before Him; that He may make the Bread the Body of Christ, and the Wine the Blood of Christ; for whatsoever the Holy Ghost has touched, is surely sanctified and changed." Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,XXIII:7(c.A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:154

"Let us then in everything believe God, and gainsay Him in nothing, though what is said seem to be contrary to our thoughts and senses, but let His word be of higher authority than both reasonings and sight. Thus let us do in the mysteries also, not looking at the things set before us, but keeping in mind His sayings. For His word cannot deceive, but our senses are easily beguiled. That hath never failed, but this in most things goeth wrong. Since then the word saith, 'This is my body,' let us both be persuaded and believe, and look at it with the eyes of the mind. For Christ hath given nothing sensible, but though in things sensible yet all to be perceived by the mind. So also in baptism, the gift is bestowed by a sensible thing, that is, by water; but that which is done is perceived by the mind, the birth, I mean, and the renewal. For if thou hadst been incorporeal, He would have delivered thee the incorporeal gifts bare; but because the soul hath been locked up in a body, He delivers thee the things that the mind perceives, in things sensible. How many now say, I would wish to see His form, the mark, His clothes, His shoes. Lo! thou seest Him, Thou touchest Him, thou eatest Him. And thou indeed desirest to see His clothes, but He giveth Himself to thee not to see only, but also to touch and eat and receive within thee." John Chrysostom,Gospel of Matthew,Homily 82(A.D. 370),in NPNF1,X:495

"You will see the Levites bringing the loaves and a cup of wine, and placing them on the table. So long as the prayers and invocations have not yet been made,it is mere bread and a mere cup. But when the great and wonderous prayers have been recited, then the bread becomes the body and the cup the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ....When the great prayers and holy supplications are sent up, the Word descends on the bread and the cup, and it becomes His body." Athanasius,Sermon to the Newly Baptized,PG 26,1325(ante A.D. 373),in ECD,442

This text may downloaded and viewed for private reading only. This text may not be used by another Web site or published, electronically or otherwise, without the written permission of the copyright holder. Joseph A. Gallegos © 2000 All Rights Reserved.

Gail

P.S. BTW, these quotes are offered from Mr. Gallegos WITH permission.

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), January 06, 2004.

First, thank you so much for being so totally honest. I can tell that it is quite painful. I will pray for you.

Onto the topic at hand. He is totally wrong! The early Christians were unanimous in their belief that the Euch. is the body and blood of Christ. The following site gives a good overview of early Christian writers clearly insiting on this. The first is Ignatius of Antioch and was written in 110 AD. That is really early.

http://www.catholic.com/library/Real_Presence.asp This clearly shows that his claim of a later belief is nonsense.

As for scripture: Go read John Chapter 6. It is the last half we are concerned with but go ahead and read the whole thing, it is related. Jesus is very clear! He makes sure we know he is being literal. Take a look at verse 51, "I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world."

"and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world." Where does Jesus give his flesh for the life of the world? On the cross. He says very clearly that the flesh in the bread is as real as the flesh on the cross. Was it a symbol of Jesus on the Cross? No! The bread is the same flesh he gives on the cross.

He says other things like "my flesh is real food and my blood real drink". It is very onesided.

Your friend might try to say that in verse 63 Jesus backs off, but this is totally out of context."It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life." What are the words Jesus spoke . . . eat my flesh, and my flesh is real food. All these words are spirit and life. when he says the flesh is of no avail he cannot be referring back to the flesh he just talked about for 30 odd verses because he clearly puts that in with the spirit and life side. So what flesh is of no avail? Our human little noggins, that's what. Jesus uses this figure of speach often. Look at Matthew 16:17, "For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. " This is the flesh that is of no avail, the limited human mind. (in fact go read that whole passage of Matthew 16, it is a good parralel to this text and it rules out the notion that Christ is saying that his flesh is of no avail.)

In addition to the proper interpretation of verse 63, it is just illogical to have Jesus say some 13 times (by my count) that we need to eat His flesh and then have him say 'no no I don't mean it.' He is not that sloppy of a speaker.

I can't do much more than this in the forum, but you can feel free to email me personally if you want me to go into more details. I am sure that others will respond also, some are a little prickly in tone but don't let that throw you.

In Christ, Dano

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), January 06, 2004.

Gail, You always beat me to the punch with the Father's. I don't know who you are but I like you already!

Jason, Gail quotes most of the same Father's that the link I sent does. I still suggest you go look at it. Catholic Answers library is a great resource in general so keep it in mind in the future.

In Christ, Dano

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), January 06, 2004.

Hey Dan,

So you're a fellow Church-Father-Quoter too! Great! Here's the link where I get my quotes. Mr. Gallegos is a very experienced Catholic apologist and posts the fathers according to topic in order to defend our Church's teachings on Mary, purgatory, sola fide, sola scriptura, and on and on. Very very useful indeed! The Fathers do indeed still speak, don't they? He also posts transcripts of debates he has with some very prominent Protestant apologists, much to their dismay I'm sure.

http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/contents.htm

I'll check out your link too.

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), January 06, 2004.

Hi Jason,

Your background story sounds very much like mine. I truely understand the bouts of agnosticism. I used to feel a degree of antagonism toward religion especially toward the "fundamentalist" orientation. I've only re-joined the Church for the past year and a half, and still have massive struggles with faith.

I think its important to find a Catholic Church that you like and can become a part of its community. Going to Mass every Sunday is hugely important not just because its an "obligation" and you "have to"...it reinforces something about the journey back to Catholicism at a deeper level, (at least it has for me.)

I find visiting this forum to be very helpful. You'll learn plenty and find people whose faith is inspiring. You'll also find forum contributors who can help you to understand difficult doctrinal issues. In "the real world" its sometimes impossible to find people to associate with, and to openly discuss spiritual matters. Religious discussions at the bar, or in the lunchroom don't often go very well. Sometimes they don't go well at this forum, you might not always like what you hear, some posters will sound harsh, but you'll learn about your faith.

Along with attending Mass, I find checking out this forum helps to keep me on track. I feel better about things now, than I did when I "knew too much" and felt I was intellectually "above" midieval religious traditions. Just my limited experience, "a year and a half" is nothing to brag about or to become overly self confident with... I hope it goes well for you!

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), January 06, 2004.

also, after thinking about this for a day or two, i would say "so what" if it has semblance to something pagans did. loosely tied coincidence, right?

More likely propaganda. The idea that the Eucharist has anything to do with a pagan rite has to be proven by your friend. There is no way to disprove something that is not postulated with evidence. Ask him to provide concrete evidence, including a historical link. Otherwise it is just malicious gossip. Which just about every Church would teach is un-Christian. Bring the theory here, and we will examine it.

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmamil.com), January 06, 2004.

hello-- WOW! several pages of responses. i skimmed each response, and found in each something i cant wait to pour over later. i will print them out so that i can look at them after work, at home.

thank you to each of you who responded! im serious, thanks so much.

-- jason (jas_r_22@hotmail.com), January 07, 2004.

God Bless You Jason, we are all overjoyed to help! (Hope no one minds me speaking for all of us.)

Good Luck,

Dano

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), January 07, 2004.

Hi Jason,

At your stage in the journey, debating your friend won't bring much peace (and its more likely to obtain turmoil and conflict). But obtaining grace will bring peace, and grace is really what you need right now.

Pray and frequent the sacraments. You will find that your faith grows and it will be much easier to put your trust in God.

And if you really apply yourself, especially by living the beatitudes, you'll find a peace and freedom you never imagined possible.

God bless,

-- Pat Delaney (pat@patdelaney.net), January 08, 2004.

Jason,

This document in the link below changed the way I look at the Eucharist and I fully understand the mystery of Christ spirit in the bread and wine. I have come to the conclusion that it is difficult to understand our faith as it is revealed in the New Testament, until you understand the Jewish faith our faith is built upon. The apostles and Jesus were Jews and the Jewish faith of the Old Testament must be understood from it's historical perspective. Then we can begin to understand the New Testament. This is all done very well in this document. The Catholic Church is very Jewish in nature and the True Church should be very Jewish in nature. Many protestant denomination have a real absense of historical and biblical Jewish foundation to their faith.

Enjoy!

http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/4THCUP.HTM

Aaron Junkersfeld

P.S. - If you like this from Scott Hahn, then read his five documents on salvation history and 4 documents on the 4 marks of the Church. They reside in the same link.

-- Aaron Junkersfeld (ajunkersfeld@indy.rr.com), January 08, 2004.

Gail said: He [Joseph A. Gallegos] also posts transcripts of debates he has with some very prominent Protestant apologists, much to their dismay I'm sure.

http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/contents.htm ---------

Gail, Where could I find these debate transcripts, do you know? I looked all over his website and I am at a loss. I would be particularly interested in any that debate a Calvinist/Reformed perspective.

For that matter, if anyone knows about any debate links, especially on Calvinist doctrines v. Catholic, please share!

Thanks and may God bless you all with His grace,

Emily :)

P.S. Jason, I am having a difficult time as well. My father is trying to convince me why Catholicism is wrong, while my mother tries to convince me that Protestantism is wrong. If it were not for my relationship with Jesus and my belief in the truth of Christianity, I think I would have given up on religion altogether.

But praise God for His grace in understanding our struggles and meeting us at our point of need. Someone posted the following quote in this forum, and I believe that it may speak to you as it did to me:

"Faith sustains us in the hour when reason tells us that we can not continue, that the whole of our whole lives is without meaning," Brother Alwyn in _The Deconstruction of Falling Stars_.

-- Emily (jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), January 13, 2004.

FYI to anyone who reads this thread, I reposted my question about debates at this link: http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00Bijz

God bless,

-- Emily (jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), January 17, 2004.

Hi Jason,

The Eucharistic sacrifice is the fount and apex of the whole christian life. -- Lumen Gentium, Dogmatic Constitution on The Church, Nov. 21, 1964

The Eucharistic sacrifice is the source and summit of the Church’s life and of our personal journey of santification. -- Homily, Pope John Paul II, June 14, 1998

IF THE ANGELS WERE CAPABLE OF ENVY, THEY WOULD ENVY US FOR TWO THINGS: ONE IS THE RECEIVING OF THE HOLY COMMUNION, AND THE OTHER IS SUFFERING. -- Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska (Outstanding Mystic of The Church, 1905-1938)

When I went to Communion once I called to mind the exceeding Great Majesty of Our Lord I had seen, and considered that it was He who is present in the Most Holy Sacrament, and very often Our Lord was pleased to show Himself to me in the Host; the very hairs of my head stood, and I thought I should come to nothing ...
When I behold Thy Great Majesty hidden beneath that which is so slight as the Host is, I am filled with wonder, ever since that vision, at Thy Great Wisdom. -- Saint Teresa of Avila (Doctor and Outstanding Mystic of The Church, 1515-1582)

The Holy Eucharist is the only legitimate addiction in the world. -- Father Angelus Shaughnessy, EWTN

-- no substitute for the Sacred Host (eat@the.Eucharist), January 17, 2004.

Aaron,

Thanks for the link to Scott Hahn's Fourth Cup. Very good stuff. It gave me an even greater appreciation for the Eucharist, what it is, and what it means.

-- Andy (aszmere@earthlink.net), January 18, 2004.

First, regarding your friend, one must test the spirit, even the devil can tranform himself as an angle of God. Regarding your friend speaking in tongues, well the Bible says if one speaks in tongues without having "LOVE" in him is useless and as your friend says that the Body and Blood of Christ, is of pagan tradition, this is false therefore he shows hate and not"LOVE" regarding the Body and Blood of Christ being 110% Jesus,in which case the tongue that he speaks is of no value without LOVE. The Catholic Church, takes years to approve a "vision" wether it be of our Lord, or our Blessed Mother. The Church does well to do so, for the Bible says you must test the spirit.

Now reagarding Eucharist, (John 6: 52) Then the Jews started arguing with one another: 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?' They said.

Jason, you see the Jews above to whom our Lord spoke to, knew exactly what our Lord meant, and that is, "to eat his flesh" We Catholic through the race of Jesus believe this 110% as those Jews did.

(John 6: 59-60) goes on to say: He taught this "doctrine" in Capernaum, in the synagogue. 'After hearing it, many of his followers said, 'This s intolerable language. How could anyone accept it?

Jason, today many people do not accept it, like your friend. To your friend, this is "intolerable language." You must pray for him to believe.

(JOHN 6: 66) After this, Many of his diciples left him and and stopped going with him.

FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT BELIEVE IN JESUS EUCHARIST HAS THE SPIRIT OF ANTI CHRIST IN HIM, THE NUMBER 666. Could this be by DEVINE chance that this was written in (John 6:66)

Jason, did our Lord run after those who left him. No! Did Jesus say come back it is only a figure of speach I did not relly mean for you to eat my flesh. No! The Only thing Jesus did was he turned to his apostles and said do you want to leave me too. the apostles answered "NO! you have the words of everlasting life.

God Bless You

Palatto1

-- Lee S. (palatto1@aol.com), February 02, 2004.

Hello Lee,

I thought it would be noteworthy to add that the numerical references in the Bible that provide chapter and verse divisions (eg. John 6:66) are not from the original text. I believe they were added in the 1500s. Does anyone know if these were declared as an official Catholic division that made them inspired? I am not aware that they were, but I could be wrong. I have always thought that the numbers of chapter and verse and the divisions themselves are not inspired.

God bless,

-- Emily (jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), February 02, 2004.

Jmj

Hello, Emily.
The division of the texts of the Bible into chapters and verses is not considered something "inspired" by God. According to Catholic teaching, (divine) "public revelation" ceased with the death of the last Apostle. Although the Holy Spirit may have prompted later men to make helpful divisions of the text, it cannot be claimed that He inspired the specific numbering that they chose to use.

The division into chapters did not occur until the early 13th century, when it was done by Stephen Langton, the Archbishop of Canterbury. The division into verses came much later -- in the 16th century, when a French printer, Robert Stephanus (Stephens) published a complete Latin Vulgate in 1555. Both of these men were Catholics.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), February 03, 2004.