"I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square. His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history." -Cardinal Francis George

Thursday, July 28, 2011

Protestant non-participation in Communion

Jed said:
“I am not aware of any protestant group that doesn't participate in the sacrament of communion.”
I replied:
“just off the top of my head, there are people within your own movement that don't. Not the "Grace" churches probably, but the more Acts 28 types. If you disagree, I can show evidence.”
Jed then said:
“Regarding Communion: I don't disagree that there are splinter factions of many churches that either do it very rarely or not at all.”
But you did deny that exact thing! And the main ones are Dispensationalist “splinters” like the Acts 28 types. And they use much of the same reasoning you use to reject water baptism.
“If we were really going to be serious and follow Jesus' example we would do it while eating a feast as they were at the last supper. There is a strong tradition in both the Circumcision and Grace for communion.”
Jesus example was not to have a “feast” per se, it was to have a liturgy. The celebration of the passover meal was a liturgical act for the Jews, where they participated in the actual passover, and Jesus transformed that act into the liturgical act of the new covenant when He said “this is my Body” and then said “do this in remembrance of me”. In the original passover the word “remembrance” is used also, and the disciples knew what was going on. And the Hebrew idea of remembrance is far different than ours. Their concept was one of “reliving” but more like actually being there. They would actually refer to themselves in the passover meal as having been there with Moses! It is much more than a feast Jed. It was a participation in the passover for those celebrating it. And they had to actually eat the flesh of the sacrifice to participate. So when Jesus changes it into the “passover” of the “new covenant in His Blood”, they would have understood this in a liturgical way, just as they understood the passover meal. And when He said “this is my body”, you can bet they thought back to the incident in John 6 when he goes on and on about eating his flesh, and that his flesh is “real food”. Once it is in the context of the passover, it is an “aha” moment for them.
And EVERYTHING we know about the early church shows they thought of it this way as well, that it was literally the flesh of God that must be eaten (with faith of course) to gain eternal life. Ignatius in 107AD called it the “medicine of immortality.” St. Paul is really clear to the Cointhians as well that it is “a participation in the body and blood of our Lord”.

“The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?”

Just like the passover, when we follow the Tradition handed down to us by the apostles and partake in the liturgy of the Eucharist (thanksgiving), we “participate”. We don't merely “remember” in the english meaning of the word.
This leads me to your use of the word “sacrament.” Your denomination calls it an ordinance, and I will bet you $100 bucks that if you ask your pastor if it is a sacrament he will adamantly say “no, it is an ordinance” and he will say it does absolutely nothing other than help us have a reminder of Christs death for us. Sacraments “do” things Jed. Dou believe the eating the bread and wine “does” something? That God acts in a special way? If not, you do not believe it is a sacrament. If so, then you do. But if you do believe it is a sacrament, I would be very interested to know that! Jesus and Paul sure thought it was a sacrament!

Demographics of the Real Presence

Demographics of World Religion 2011 compiled by David Meyer
 Kendra said:

Just a side note, "most Christians" do not take John 6 literally the way you do, just Catholics. Do Calvanists also?
Actually, you are badly mistaken, "most Christians" do take it quite literally, and it is central to their doctrine.

2/3 of them (67%)!

And it is not just Catholic. Remember that Eastern Orthodoxy is half the size of Protestantism, and Catholicism alone is over half of Christianity. And that is just in 2011. Historically it was near 100% who believed in the real presence. Until Protestantism in the 16th century, the vast majority of Christians believed in the Real Presence. So if we take the # of Christians of all time who believed it, I would estimate it being well above 90%

Also, Calvin’s view would be considered by Zwinglians (your view is the Zwinglian view) to be a “Real Presence” view. But most modern Calvinists do not follow Calvin in his thinking on this and have become Zwinglians on the issue.

Calvin believed that we truly and substantially parkate of the flesh of Christ, but that it happens through the intermediary of the Holy Spirit. This was my view as a Calvinist, and I took John 6 quite literally, as the text itself demands.

How do I get 67%?

As far as the demographics of who believes in the Real Presence, We can take the Catholic (51%) and Orthodox (11%) and get 62% of Christendom right there. Although they explain it poorly, I would add 25% of Calvinists, All Lutherans, and certainly some % of Anglicans and other groups to the “Real Presense” list. They (including Luther himself) would interpret John 6 literally. (“Truly I say to you…My Flesh is real food, and my Blood is real drink…”) So I think it is fair to include Anglicans (12% of Protestants) and Lutherans (11%) with a quarter of the Reformed and “other” (3+% of Protestants) ... for a total of ~26% of Protestants being convinced from scripture of the Real Presence. Protestants are 21% of Christianity, and ~26% of 21% is ~5.5%. So 5.5% of Christianity is protestants who believe in the real presence.

If we combine the 100% of Catholics (51%) 100% of Orthodox (11%) and 26% of Protestants (5.5%) we get a total of 67.5% of Christianity which believes in some way in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

I think a lesson here is that we often have a colored view of demographics and history. You seemed to think your view was the strong majority, when it is the minority. When I was Reformed, I knew that Reformed people made up only 11% of Protestant Christianity, and conservative ones far less than that, perhaps 5%? Yet even with that 5% in mind, I was tempted to think of my Reformed theology/Calvinism as a serious player in the game. It just isn’t. If we are talking about conservative Protestants, they are Pentecostal… hands down, and that trend is increasing rapidly.

You might be interested to know that your Mid-Acts Dispensationalist denomination Grace Gospel Fellowship reports 60,000 members. Perhaps we could double or triple that figure for all people on earth with your particular views about scripture? If you are correct, you are really lucky to have found the truth while nearly the entire globe is so deceived! And who believed what you believe before Stam and the others in the 20s/30s? From what I can tell they are the first. (other than St. Paul *of course*) Bulinger would be the closest, but I know you guys don’t agree with his more Acts 28 type view. (he rejected communion btw Jed) Just food for thought. I mean, numbers don’t make something true of course. But isn’t it just a bit weird to be part of something that is so small and goes back less than a hundred years? 150 years tops if you include “traditional” Dispensationalism?

My overarching point is that Protestantism continues to splinter, while it still contains people who truly desire the truth from scripture. Either the scripture is false, or the way Protestants are trying to access its truth is wrong. You simply cannot claim the scripture is “clear” and have thousands of conflicting interpretations. The only option then is to say all the other guys just don’t get it. That is the position you are in. You are forced to say that even among fellow Protestants, who have largely only been around <500 years, that even they have totally missed the whole point of scripture.

So not only have the Catholics and E.O. been utterly and fatally wrong for 2000 years, but even the 99.9% (not an exaggerated # btw) of your fellow Protestants have gotten the scripture totally wrong until Stam and the boys came along.

You can choose to dismiss all this by saying numbers don’t matter, and your right, alone they prove nothing. But it is really hard to take you seriously if you say the Scripture is clear and at the same time only 0.000000001% of Christians who have ever lived and read the scripture can see that same *clarity*. It can’t be clear and yet billions of spirit filled Christians completely missed the main point of the new testament for 1900 years!

Monday, July 11, 2011

My Family is on Youtube!

This is our family's first evangelization video! I noticed our kids were enthrawled by other kids online in videos. So I got an idea to have them evangelize other kids (and their parents possibly!) At the same time it is a great incentive for them to learn their memorization verses and catechism. Enjoy!

Visit the youtube channel for "The Catholic Kids" here.

If you like the video please say a Hail Mary for my family!


David Meyer

Sunday, July 10, 2011

To Mom

This is a plant my Mom asked me to video and send to her. Love you Mom!

Thursday, July 7, 2011

THIS is what we need to pray for Fr. Corapi

For Father Corapi,

That the Lord would Shut his mouth.
That he would return to his order and prostrate himself before his superior.
That he would live out his life as a silent cloistered monk praying for the Church.

Please dear Lord, hear our prayer. Have mercy on your Church and defend us from men like Corapi who would heap scandal upon scandal. Close his mouth Lord.

In nomine Patris et fillii et Spiritus Sancti