Skip to comments."A Little Bread and Wine Does No Harm..."
Posted on 04/25/2014 8:17:25 AM PDT by BlatherNaut
If Pope Francis really said that, then as to whether the Church is governed by a manifest heretic, all bets would be off.
Would Fr Lombardi please clarify at least that the Pope definitely didn't say that?
Someone left a comment on my blog saying it is 'impossible that he said that'.
It's not impossible. Before he became Pope, remember that Francis was a Cardinal, before that a Bishop, so, in fact, anything's possible.
A Norbertine brother once said to me that every major crisis in the Church has been about the Real Presence. And the crisis of the Church is a crisis of Bishops.
Indeed, the first crisis among Christ and the Apostles (though it was not a crisis for Jesus) was in the immediate wake of the Eucharistic discourse. Many disciples left Jesus after that and it was left to Peter (first Il Papa) to speak up on the Apostles behalf, saying, 'Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the message of eternal life.' That's kind of like what giving religious assent to the incredible is.
If this Pope doesn't believe that the Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul, Humanity and Divinity of Our Lord, then that wouldn't just explain things a little. That would explain everything.
If he didn't believe that doctrine, or openly opposed it, that would pose serious problems for Catholics across the World, because that would make the Pope outside of Communion with the Divine Head of the Church, Jesus Christ. The implications are terrifying.
The Vatican must, at least, confirm that the Pope did not say that because if Pope Francis did say that, the Pope shouldn't be receiving Holy Communion.
As a non-Catholic I find this whole thing strange. I would never put some ritual above faith in Jesus.
If you worship it as God, it does. Salvation and spiritual growth don’t come from what you put into your mouth.
It is not a ritual, it is exactly how Catholic’s fulfill Christ’s direct, personal and explicit command for all Christians of John 6:
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; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.
The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?
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.
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.
If you put your ‘faith in Jesus’, why do you not do as He commands you to do in John 6?..
For the Greater Glory of God
I hate when blog posts ... and sometimes even news articles ... write as if the reader is entirely familiar with the issue at hand. Guess what, losers: (not you, the original author) if we were, we wouldn’t have any cause to read your opinionated drivel on the subject.
Whoever wrote this piece is a moron.
"The Holy See must personally prove a negative to me!"
Pride is not only a cardinal sin, it is often unintentionally hilarious.
I believe understand your statement, what I don’t understand is the necessity of taking every single word of the 6,000+ year old Genesis creation story literally; yet when it comes to a direct command from Christ’s mouth, witnessed and written about by Holy Spirit inspired writers only 2,000 years ago - that it is metaphor.
For the Greater Glory of God
Not quite. Actually, not at all. What Catholics do is claim that when a certain fellow chants a phrase over some wafer and wine, they can pretend that it becomes the body and blood of Jesus. They openly crucify Him again and conduct a pagan scene of re-enacting His execution. The Scriptures simply say to eat and drink in remembrance of Him. May wish to read the rest of the story.
“Scriptures simply say to eat and drink in remembrance of Him”
so Dutch... Do you actually eat and drink something which to you represents the Body and Blood of our Lord as He asks?
or do you stay home and “Church yourself” on the Lords’ Day with Ripple and saltines?
For the Greater Glory of God
Fallout From a Phone Call
April 25, 2014 By Fr. Dwight Longenecker
Heres what we know: Pope Francis did make a personal pastoral phone call to a woman in Argentina. It is believed that the woman is in an irregular marriage relationship. The womans husband claims that the Pope said it was okay for her to go to communion.
Thats all we know. The Vatican press office has issued a statement acknowledging the call and lamenting the media amplification. I share that regret, and here is some of the fallout from that media amplification:
In this article on the story in Londons Daily Mail the pope is quoted as saying there is no harm in the woman receiving communion. The headline writer added to the popes words, so his comment now reads. A little bread and wine does no harm. Now, thanks to the papers, the pope is not only undermining the sacrament of marriage but he is referring to the Body of Christ and the Precious Blood as A little bread and wine.
Note that this not what the pope said, but a few extra words the headline writer put into the popes mouth.
We must therefore be extremely cautious about taking seriously any of the press reports on this story. Through ignorance and malevolence the members of the secular press will distort the churchs teaching any way they can.
On the other hand, the Vatican news office confirmed that the phone call took place and did not deny the gist of the popes comments as reported.
Im a parish priest. Here is some further fallout from this incident at the local level: Yesterday a parishioner with marriage problems reports to me that her aunt called her to say, Its okay for you to get divorced because the Pope said divorced people can go to communion. I saw it on the morning talk show!
That same person says, My aunt is not a Catholic and shes divorced and married to my uncle who is a Catholic and their parish priest Father Frank knows the situation and gives her communion every week. He says all that legalism about becoming a Catholic and so forth doesnt matter because he knows she loves Jesus and Jesus would accept everybody.
So if the pope made the phone call or not doesnt even matter anymore. What is real is that he is perceived to have made the phone call and nobody from the Vatican has denied it and therefore, on the ground, in the trenches the ordinary people now think that divorce and remarriage are okay because the pope said it is okay. Furthermore, Father Frank, who has taken the church laws into his own hands and dispenses with marriage discipline and discipline regarding reception of communion for non-Catholics has just been affirmed in his anarchical attitude by what appears to be the popes disregard for church discipline.
Whether the pope did this or not is beside the point. It is perceived that he did so and the fallout follows.
Lest I get lots of hate mail for criticizing Pope Francis let me put it on the record that I like and admire Pope Francis. I think he is what the church needs right now. Most of my writing about him has been positive. Furthermore, Im of the opinion that the marriage discipline of the church should be examined and some sort of reform put in place for the sake of people living in the modern world. I am not a rabid right winger who thinks Pope Francis is the anti-pope before the end of the world.
However, his management of public relationsand that of his minders leaves something to be desired. Pope Benedict was accused of media gaffes, but Pope Francis is making Benedict look like the Great Communicator. This latest fiasco has added to a litany of confusion, media muddle and I, for one, wish the Vatican media folks would get their act together and help Pope Francis realize that he is no longer simply Padre Bergoglio. He is no longer a private pastor. He belongs to the world.
Yes, its very charming of him to call people about their personal problems, but is it right? There is so much potential for misunderstanding, misinformation, gossip and lies in this form of behavior that the pope must see how potentially damaging it is. As an ordinary parish priest one of the most delicate of minefields is communication with my staff, my parishioners and the extended church family. Misunderstandings, bad feelings and people jumping to wrong conclusions is a constant. Therefore people in leadership positions soon learn to keep their mouths shut, to listen and to step back from problems to carefully consider.
If the Holy Father is so much in favor of a church of the people and for the people shouldnt he respect local authorities and delegate these matters to the diocesan bishop and from there to the local priest? Where is the much vaunted Catholic principle of subsidiarityin which problems are best solved and initiatives best taken at the local level? Where is the proper understanding of hierarchyin which we have a chain of command and proper delegation to lower levels of authority?
This is, after all, the Pope who prefers to be called the Bishop of Rome and eschews the trappings of imperial power. From what we can make out he wants to reform the papacy and get away from any hint of ultramontanism and the absolute power of the papacy, and yet he gets involved in micro managing the marriage of a couple in Argentina?
Again, dont get me wrong. Im actually in favor of a table turning pope. I like the idea of him making prophetic gestures and bringing in radical reform, and I personally think its nice that he makes surprise phone calls to people.
I just wish he would be more media savvy and realize that every word he speaks echoes around the world.
I had a very thick book on the history of central Europe. Started out with cave men & then proceeded to modern times.
Many wars were fought on a continuous basis. Most puzzeling were the ones that were fought over how the Eucharist was to be administered:(
or do you stay home and Church yourself on the Lords Day with Ripple and saltines?"
LOL. No, we leave that for the Catholics on "Saint Patty's Day". Our gathering gets together and has a remembrance time with bread and wine. No fake "transubstantiation", no hocus-pocus, no special men in bathrobes chanting and claiming to have the power to change things, no misunderstandings of Scriptural admonitions...just a get together to remember the One Who shed His blood, one time for all His elect. And, it would be the "Lord's" day, unless you have more than one god.
They do worship it and they do believe that salvation comes from eating Jesus. Hence the meltdown about the popes alleged position.
This is a false opposition. I have faith in Jesus who said, “This is My Body.”
Hebrews 6:1-6 Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, and of instruction about washings, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. And this we will do if God permits. For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt. For land that has drunk the rain that often falls on it, and produces a crop useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed, and its end is to be burned.
Which in effect, nullifies the Catholic concept of sinning and then going to confession before being able to take communion again. laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works.
They crucify Him every mass, trampling underfoot the blood of Christ.
It's on again, off again salvation, which this passage condemns.
The blood is for atonement, not consumption. It's to be shed, poured out, not consumed.
Don't eat the blood, the life is in the blood
Genesis 9:4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life , that is, its blood.
Leviticus 3:17 It shall be a statute forever throughout your generations, in all your dwelling places, that you eat neither fat nor blood.
Leviticus 7:26-27 Moreover, you shall eat no blood whatever, whether of fowl or of animal, in any of your dwelling places. Whoever eats any blood, that person shall be cut off from his people.
Leviticus 17:10-14 If any one of the house of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn among them eats any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood.
Any one also of the people of Israel, or of the strangers who sojourn among them, who takes in hunting any beast or bird that may be eaten shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth. For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.
Leviticus 19:26 You shall not eat any flesh with the blood in it. You shall not interpret omens or tell fortunes.
Deuteronomy 12:16 Only you shall not eat the blood ; you shall pour it out on the earth like water.
Deuteronomy 12:23 Only be sure that you do not eat the blood, for the blood is the life , and you shall not eat the life with the flesh.
Deuteronomy 15:23 Only you shall not eat its blood; you shall pour it out on the ground like water.
Acts 15:12-29 And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. After they finished speaking, James replied, Brothers, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take from them a people for his name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written,
After this I will return, and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen; I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, that the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name, says the Lord, who makes these things known from of old.
Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.
Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They sent Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brothers, with the following letter:
The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.
The Holy Spirit says not to eat blood. It was one of the instructions HE gave to the early church fathers.
“.. no misunderstandings of Scriptural admonitions.”
What he actually said was: “..unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.” John 6:53
DB88 said you have “a remembrance time with bread and wine”
Christ said: “eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood”
That sounds like two completely different things - Christ said eat His Body and drink His Blood four separate times - you said eat bread - it is a pretty significant difference.
yeah right just a small misunderstanding of a Scriptural admonition
For the Greater Glory of God
I’m fully aware of that. I’ve been thinking about how to cast this message in simple terms for my daughter.
Jesus also said He was bread, the shepherd, the vine and the door.
And only one is not a metaphor?
I don’t think so.
God is clear in Scripture that blood is NOT to be eaten. Jesus could not have had His disciples eat it or commanded them to eat it (sin) or He would not have been sinless. He would have sinned in making others sin, thereby rendering Himself incapable of being the spotless lamb of God.
Reading it as a metaphor and recognizing the act as symbolic is the only way to read it without twisting or distorting or disobeying the rest of Scripture.
The theological gymnastics needed to justify Jesus commanding others to sin is staggering.
Jesus says right here that it's a metaphor, that eating does not impart life, the Spirit does. The flesh is NO HELP AT ALL.
Eating does not do it.
He is the door. With hinges literally on his side.
Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.
And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.
DB is only saying what Jesus said when he says it's a ceremony in remembrance.
And it is the fruit of the vine that Jesus gave His disciples to drink. He says so HIMSELF.
Bread and wine in remembrance. Just what we've been saying.
Maybe like this?
You are in error. First there is no re-enacting of the crucifixion. You are reliving the same crucifixion at that single moment in time. There is no resacrificing taken place. Second he didn’t just say eat and drink in remembrance of him. He clearly stated that this is his flesh and blood it is what caused all but 12 followers to get up and leave and one of those 12 who stayed did not believe as Jesus said and its not hard to figure out who that was. A larger point is that Jesus did this multiple times before his death and after his resurrection. Is he now re-sacrifing himself each and every time especially when he plainly stated that is his body and blood in scripture?
One additional point, we do not pretend that this is flesh and blood, we fully accept that this is his flesh and blood under the appearance of bread and wine. Why? If we are to have life we must do so and accept it as such even though the bread and wine still look/feel/taste like bread and wine. Have you forgotten that prior to is first Eucharist/Communion he has lead up to that moment through the miracles by just asking people to believe he could do it? He did not reveal to all the full truth as of yet. And if He can raise the dead yet cannot have his flesh and blood look exactly like bread and wine and require us to simply believe as he did with those he performed miracles.? Your not looking at scripture very well.
Jesus also said that if we ate or drank, we’d live forever.
What’s with all the Catholics dying then?
If you’re going to be literal, be consistent.
He is referring to this: "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the earth, out of which thou wast taken: for dust thou art, and into dust thou shalt return."
The body dies, the spirit lives forever.
"And so he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. 6 The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. 7 The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to Gods law, nor can it do so. 8 Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God.
You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life[d] because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of[e] his Spirit who lives in you."
These words of His are unequivocal: "Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you."
Jesus is the bread of life.
“Bread and wine in remembrance. Just what we’ve been saying.”
now all you’ve got to do is rationalize away that Christ said “My Body” and you said “bread” and your good to go...
For the Greater Glory of God
Wrong. The work on the cross is DONE. Jesus said *It is FINISHED*, and the curtain in the temple was torn in two.
He breathed His last.
He is now seated at the right hand of the Father in heaven. He is not still being sacrifices because if He hadn't died, salvation would not have come.
It's only in His death that He conquered death. It's not His dying that saves us, it's His death and resurrection.
Utterly false and slanderous.
Utterly false and slanderous.
So now it’s figurative when it suits the church?
That is very poor hermeneutics.
Either the passage is literal or it’s not. It’s not on again off again depending on how one wants to interpret it to support their pet doctrines.
If it’s literal eating in the body, consistency demands literal living for ever in the body.
If it’s spiritual living forever, it’s spiritual eating.
Is the mass not a continuation and participation in the death of Jesus?
Then they are killing Him every mass.
Besides, it’s His death on the tree that fulfilled Scripture.
Sacrificing Him on an altar doesn’t do a thing.
The Mass is an unbloody remembrance.
Christ said: Do this in remembrance of me.
If one does not believe his word, he is none of his. He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err. 8 I am that bread of life. 49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. 50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. 52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 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. 57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. 58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. 59 These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum. 60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? 61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? 62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? 63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. 64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. 65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. 66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. 67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?
He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.
8 I am that bread of life. 49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. 50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. 52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 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. 57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. 58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. 59 These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum. 60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? 61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? 62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? 63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. 64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. 65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. 66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. 67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?
Heaven is outside time, therefore everything is eternally present, at once "done" and "not yet done" and "still being done".
And Hebrews says that Jesus is now in the heavenly Holy of Holies -- which, it says, he will leave "at the end of the age" -- offering his own blood to the Father on our behalf.
Utterly false and slanderous.
Jesus' listeners knew exactly what he was talking about. He was telling them to do something that seemed to their ears so depraved it's beyond expressing: eat the body and drink the blood of a man. Anyone who says that isn't profoundly shocking,doesn't get the point. Why do you think they left him?
Why do you think he didn't call them back? "Stop! It's a metaphor --- a metaphor, you meatheads!"
It's THEIR fleshiness, their "meatheadedness," that avails nothing. His Flesh avails everything.
It's amazing how, in one line, you have Him invalidate His own words in the whole preceding Chapter Six.
It's like He gave this whole stunning, crisis-fraught, eloquent Eucharistic exposition, and then ends it with, "... but seriously, haha, c'mon guys, not really."
That's why all the Christians who ever lived are still walking around on this earth, and draining our Social Security System, right? Aha! YOOOOOOoooouuuu!
Why do you keep saying this, when you know, yourself, that it's not true?
Excellent article; thanks.
Yes! Also we need to be reminded what the word Amen really means we forget because we say it too often without understanding it not only to end a prayer only. Amen equals “ So Be It. “ So Chrst is declaring without a doubt it is real in IMHO.