Many people will also probably question that 2+2=4

Judas questioned that Christ was the Messiah, probably

🅱️eter questioned 3 times

The early Church also had other heresies spring up, like nestorianism. Just because some random person thought something doesn't mean it's true.

My main issue with Protestantism is the fact that there are so many different Denominations all claiming they're the only ones who are right.

<:ferd:441049447032553472>

I don't even understand what that sentence tries to say. Of course eating the flesh and blood has an effect on your spirit, because they are literally the flesh and blood

Who's saying that

Aaaah if only the apostles had named succesors

Orthodox answer: The mystery of the holy eucharist defies analysis and explanation in purely rational and logical terms. For the eucharist—and Christ Himself—is indeed a mystery of the Kingdom of Heaven which, as Jesus has told us, is “not of this world.” The eucharist—because it belongs to God’s Kingdom—is truly free from the earth-born “logic” of fallen humanity.

The orthodox answer seems ambiguous. You could use that to justify symbolic. Consubstantiation & transubstantiation.

Ambiguous - That's mystery for you

There is nothing symbolic about it

Seems pretty straightforward to me: the accidents are those of bread and wine, but the essence if that of the flesh and blood of Christ. And this trascends reason because it is not something we can conclude from other things, or from ana analysis of whatever

It is a revelation, and if at some point you have doubts, follow the councils of the Church etc.

I haven't take communion in over a year in fear of breahing 1 Corinthians 11:29. I haven't fully figured it out yet

**1 Corinthians 11:29 - New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)**

```Dust


<29> For all who eat and drink without discerning the body, eat and drink judgment against themselves. ```

Confession time, probably

Breaching*

Protestant communion isn't actual communion. The bread and grape juice isn't consecrated

Instead of trying to "figure it out", read what the succesors of the apostles and the councils said. Don't be prideful.

Fair enough :)

I'm raised protestant like so confession is something I've never done.

I was raised catholic but without actual involvement and compromise, and it took me many years to confess for the first time

I don't think confession is imperative for salvation. Surely you can just repent and ask God for forgiveness.

People cannot be trusted to repent by themselves

Surely if someone truly repents he will go to confession

That is why you can see many people who, a lot of time after repenting, they cry when they confess

Because there is this awareness of a full act of seeking forgiveness and acknowledgement of sin

"I am repentant. But I don't need to go to confession"

Pride is a terrible thing

To be fair. If I was to confess my sins it would be to someone I know and feel comfortable with. I don't see the benefit of telling some stranger in a box everything I've done wrong. And like ontop of that surely my sin is between God and I and it is for God to forgive. The priest is not essential in this.

Look, we are all ashamed of our sins, and we all have tried to look for excuses so that we don't have to confess them

>someone I know and feel comfortable with
So, your spiritual father?

Well, in Orthodoxy you have the comfort of looking your father in the eyes as you tell him what kind of a scumbag you are

@Daniil
Isn't our spiritual father God? Not necisarry a priest.

inb4 call no man your father bit

The priest acts on behalf of God, precisely, which is why God gives the Church authority to forgive sins

And why it is basic teaching that it is God that forgives sins