- Topic
YoMomma SoFat wrote:
Emil,
The bread AND wine is the PO. The bread the WMSCOG members eat on resurrection day is not PO because there is no wine.
Do you mean that everytime there is bread and wine it is a Passover? What if they just happened to be eating bread and drinking wine on a regular day (because they were very common in those days, and today)?
They were just eating bread and drinking wine.
Please remember I’m speaking from a members perspective.
They were just eating bread and drinking wine.
Please remember I’m speaking from a members perspective.
YoMomma SoFat wrote:
Emil,
The bread AND wine is the PO. The bread the WMSCOG members eat on resurrection day is not PO because there is no wine.
In the catholic church, communion is almost exclusively bread. Yet my former catholic, now wmscog friend insists it is evil to have it frequently because the PO is only once a year. "Do you celebrate your birthday every day/week or once a year?" she asks. "Then why is communion daily/weekly?" So why is it when catholics have communion, it is wrong because we are falsely celebrating PO frequently while for them, bread more than once is OK because it is not PO? Similarly when Jesus broke break after his resurrection.
As MM said, their interpretation of scripture and standard changes depending on who it applies to.
Its still consistent because your claiming it as being a fulfillment
Simon wrote:
Its still consistent because your claiming it as being a fulfillment
Of the PO? No I'm not. The PO seder meal was the event at which the Eucharist was established. A more complete part of the events of that day are commemorated once a year on Maundy Thursday.
The PO itself is fulfilled by the death of Jesus on the cross, the sacrifice of the unblemished lamb. This is followed by the resurrection – the victory over death. Those are the two events that were foreshadowed by the original OT PO.
No the command found in mtt 26 mark 14 and luke 22
^ What about the command? Can you elaborate?
People know the communion isn’t just bread.
The command to eat and the command to drink. I presume..
Absolutely Renita. What was it that Jesus gave those two disciples after his resurrection? Was it communion, PO or something else?
Anyway, I would like Simon to answer what he means.
Something else.
The Catholics, from personal research, keep communion because Jesus kept “PO” and Paul said “as often as you keep it”. The fact that it’s on a Sunday is just a coincidence.
^ Not quite accurate. We have communion because Jesus said to do so. Not because he kept "PO"
The fact that Jesus kept the Jewish law is a completely different issue. According to me, the PO is not bread and wine. That is the wmscog definition. The PO is the sacrificial lamb whose blood was on the doorpost causing the angel of death to passover.
For us, that lamb is Jesus, once and for all.
Renita got it right on… As should be obvious
Hell it should have been obvious before I referenced verses
Emil, do you just want to argue? I said “PO” with quotes because that’s what we’re talking about. I’d rather not say bread and wine every time I want to refer to the bread and wine. Jesus kept “PO” aka bread and wine aka the last supper aka whatever the curse you want to call it. According to personal research, not according to your specific Catholic church, but according to personal research the “PO” aka bread and wine aka last supper aka whatever the curse you want to call it the Catholics keep on Sundays is not the same as the bread (without wine) the WMSCOG eat on one Sunday (which is the first Sunday after their PO) of the year. You refuse to accept that it’s not PO.
Plus, I was told by Catholics plural that using the word communion is in reference to the blood and body. If you just ate bread (only the body) it’s not communion. You have to have them together. My old apostolic church told me the same thing.
@Renita – I'm sorry I guess the problem is with terminology. OK let me put down some points:
1. While the wmscog calls the consumption of "the body and blood" of Jesus as the "PO," scripture does not support this. 1 Cor 11:17~ describes the liturgy and call it "The Lord's Supper." I am not aware of any place in scripture where "the body and blood" is called the "PO." The quicker we realize the misuse of PO by wmscog, the faster we will call their bluff.
2. Any Catholic who told you that the bread alone isn't communion is wrong. In the early church, communion was bread and wine turned into the body and blood of Jesus. As the church grew, this became impractical. We now receive communion under a single species of "body" most of the time. It is understood that the blood is integral to the body. It is only in small gatherings that we receive under both species.
3. We have daily worship called "M a s s" at which we receive communion. It is not just on Sundays.
4. Finally, if the wmscog claims that the catholic communion is not the same as their "PO," then how can they also say that we are evil because we have it frequently? I don't want to argue but just clarifying what I was talking about.
Emil, just curious, in your country you don't have the option to recieve both, everyday if you want?
I know we don't have to but here the option is there everyday
Harry wrote:
Emil, just curious, in your country you don't have the option to recieve both, everyday if you want?
I know we don't have to but here the option is there everyday
I am not sure if there is an option. I have never actually seen anyone opting to receive under both species at masses open to the general public. I know that when we have small private masses for small groups at retreats and such, communion is distributed under both species. At nuptial masses also, the bridal couple is given under both species.
In my current parish, the number of people attending daily m a s s are relatively few and it may still be feasible but for a Sunday m a s s it would take prohibitively long if they were to distribute both species. Then again, on a week day, people need the ma s s to be finished in time because they need to go to work.
emil wrote:
4. Finally, if the wmscog claims that the catholic communion is not the same as their "PO," then how can they also say that we are evil because we have it frequently? I don't want to argue but just clarifying what I was talking about.
I know you asked Renita this but I have been discussing this and I think I can flesh out what I said earlier far better…
Jesus commands us to take eucharist (or whatever name you give it)
WMSCOG insists Passover is the fulfillment of Jesus's same command you get eucharist from
So they are saying you are wrong in fulfilling the same command and pointing out several differences (eucharist vs passover, bread or wine vs bread and wine, more frequently vs "once a year")
So you are doing the command "wrong" not the "passover" wrong it's just that to them the command is passover
(now that I typed it I am not sure if that is really clearer)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.