Posted on 03/11/2015 2:49:15 PM PDT by RnMomof7
MAYBE you are correct about what he was holding —whether it was artos or azymos, and what the implications of that might be.
MAYBE you are correct about the frequency of the commemortive celebration.
BUT you asked a question. I answered it.
How very typical to change the subject!
You mean the ones that were added to in the late fourth or early fifth century so that we really don't what he actually wrote at all with surity?
>>Justin Martyr, Apologia prima pro Christanis 65.<<
You didn't read the article?
I think you need to read the article.
Yes, absolutely.
People need to keep all this in the proper perspective
Oh, it’s horrible.
After he wrote that he also wrote Jews should be treated with love and charity.
I just did.
.
>> “Therefore the blind Jews are truly stupid fools.” <<
.
This is not a scriptural belief!
One of the reasons that they were blinded was to preserve the knowledge of the true worship for our time.
The churches have severely perverted the words of Yeshua and his apostles, and there is no organized church today that preaches what Yeshua and his apostles called their gospel.
.
>
>> “Not a healthy one, nor one that strives for objectivity.” <<
No Kidding!
.
What is “the true worship”?
Well, you went from following one fallible man to a group of fallible men! Big step!!
This is going to be interesting ... :-) ... hold on and let me get some popcorn ... LOL ...
This article is pure hogwash. It’s the consequence of Protestantism what Hillarie Belloc said that unless other heresies, Protestantism “spawned a cluster of heresies.”
This article is all for low IQ Bible Christians given that leading pre-eminent Lutheran and Episcopalian theologians have converted to Catholicism such as the likes of the brilliant Henry Newman (whose books are part of the theological curriculum of every major university) or Richard Neuhaus the leading American Lutheran of his times, author of several books and scholarly articles, who not only converted to Catholicism but ended up being a Catholic priest.
As they say, there is Catholicism, and then every other brand of heresy on earth
Ohs nos! You used a non-Christian to make a point!
Show me.
I can show you where the argument goes the other way.
Try googling: "Aquinas Summa Eucharist."
I'm sorry if I seem fretful and aggressive. It's probably because I AM fretful and aggressive.
I became a Catholic in 1994. TWENTY YEARS before that I KNEW, 'cause I'd READ it, that Aquinas did not say what this guy says the Catholic Church says.
Nobody pays me to write. My "War and Peace" length articles are not posted on FR. I receive no honors. But I know more than this bozo knows -- and I learned it 20 YEARS before I became a Catholic, because I was.By God's good Grace, more interested in understanding than in winning.
Sloppy, ignorant work like this makes me SICK! IF he's so SURE that we're wrong and he's right, then at least let him have the integrity to be a LITTLE BIT CAREFUL about what we're wrong about!
You know, kids see through this. And SMART kids not only see through it, but have a LOT of difficulty forgiving it. One of my long-time cherished friends was brought up in an aggressively Protestant, and thoroughly hypocritical, neighborhood of Arkansas. Beaten and otherwise abused wives were stifled because it would have been a scandal to bring shame on the deacons.
And as if that weren't bad enough, the intellectual dishonesty was everywhere. It wasn't about Truth, about throwing oneself at the feet of Him who said HE was the Truth. It was about control, guilt, and domination -- the very things Catholics are accused of, though I've seen them not only all across the variations of Christianity but in Buddhism as well!
But this lady is VERY intelligent. So she just looked around her neighborhood, saw that all the Xtians were lying and arguing with fallacies, and she decided that Xtianity is all lies and fallacies.
At whose hand, do you suppose, will God require her life on the last day? What good, Protestant, Xtian shepherds DROVE her out of the flock because of her desire for Truth?
And yet irrelevant drivellike this piece are posted on line, stuff that puts the very idea of scholarship to shame. I used to say, in my cynical youth, that Catholic Schools were institutions designed to prevent intelligent Catholics. Now I see that everywhere there are people who are so eager for the APPEARANCE of something like victory that they really don't care about the reality -- the "substance" of the Truth, if you will.
You know, I think it would be WONDERFUL if the intelligent and thoughtful and serious Protestants on FR would become Catholic. But I'm THRILLED that they're Christians, and serious enough to engage on the big and juicy stuff while trying to be the gospel they preach. My dear friend ... if God touched her and she joined a nearby Baptist congregation, I'd be THRILLED. I'd drive to see her and engage in friendly arguments and in grateful prayer.
But this vile and despicable sloppiness is running our children off. They CAN think. They DO think. And when it is OBVIOUS that this guy begins with a lie and then demonstrates a complete lack of an understanding of how to listen to a parent, to the Fathers, the children are watching. This will not end happily.
If we don't value losing to the Truth before winning some little dispute with whatever sophistry comes to hand, the lost gentiles will be put on our account.
Hey... wait -- is this a trick question?
:D
The answer is, nothing they believe comes from Scripture. Unless it's twisted.
Hoss
http://practicalapologetics.blogspot.com/2013/07/early-church-fathers-on-eucharist.html
Ignatius of Antioch Epistle to the Romans ch 7 [50-117 AD]
“I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible”
Ignatius of Antioch Epistle to the Smyraeans ch 6-8 [50-117 AD]********
“Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes”
Justin Martyr First Apology ch 66 [100-165 AD]
“We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both 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.
Irenaeus of Lyon Fragments 13 (120-180 ad)
For when the Greeks, having arrested the slaves of Christian catechumens, then used force against them, in order to learn from them some secret thing [practised] among Christians, these slaves, having nothing to say that would meet the wishes of their tormentors, except that they had heard from their masters that the divine communion was the body and blood of Christ, and imagining that it was actually flesh and blood, gave their inquisitors answer to that effect.
Irenaeus of Lyons [120-180 AD] Adversus Haereses (Book IV, Chapter 18.5)
But our opinion is in accordance with the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn establishes our opinion. For we offer to Him His own, announcing consistently the fellowship and union of the flesh and Spirit. For as the bread, which is produced from the earth, when it receives the invocation of God, is no longer common bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly; so also our bodies, when they receive the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, having the hope of the resurrection to eternity.
Tertullian On the Resurrection of the Flesh ch 8 [160-240 AD]
“[T]here is not a soul that can at all procure salvation, except it believe whilst it is in the flesh, so true is it that the flesh is the very condition on which salvation hinges. And since the soul is, in consequence of its salvation, chosen to the service of God, it is the flesh which actually renders it capable of such service. The flesh, indeed, is washed [in baptism], in order that the soul may be cleansed . . . the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands [in confirmation], that the soul also may be illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds [in the Eucharist] on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God”
Hippolytus Extant Works and Fragments On Proverbs 10:1 (170-236 ad)
—”Come, eat of my bread, and drink of the wine which I have mingled for you;” by which is meant, that He gave His divine flesh and honoured blood to us, to eat and to drink it for the remission of sins.
Origen Against Celsus book 8 ch 33 (185-254)
But we give thanks to the Creator of all, and, along with thanksgiving and prayer for the blessings we have received, we also eat the bread presented to us; and this bread becomes by prayer a sacred body, which sanctifies those who sincerely partake of it...
Hilary of Poitiers On the Trinity book 8 par 14 (300-367 ad)
For He says Himself, My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He that eateth My flesh and drinketh My blood abideth in Me, and I in him. As to the verity of the flesh and blood there is no room left for doubt. For now both from the declaration of the Lord Himself and our own faith, it is verily flesh and verily blood. And these when eaten and drunk, bring it to pass that both we are in Christ and Christ in us. Is not this true? Yet they who affirm that Christ Jesus is not truly God are welcome to find it false.
Basil Letter de Spiritu Sancto ch 37 (329-379 ad)
For that Body was once, by implication, bread, but has been consecrated by the inhabitation of the Word that tabernacled in the flesh. Therefore, from the same cause as that by which the bread that was transformed in that Body was changed to a Divine potency, a similar result takes place now. For as in that case, too, the grace of the Word used to make holy the Body, the substance of which came of the bread, and in a manner was itself bread, so also in this case the bread, as says the Apostle(8), “is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer”; not that it advances by the process of eating(9) to the stage of passing into the body of the Word, but it is at once changed into the body by means of the Word, as the Word itself said, “This is My Body.”
Cyril of Jerusalem Catechetical Lecture 19 par 7 [315-386 AD]
“The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ”
Cyril of Jerusalem Catechetical Lecture 22 par 1 (315-386 ad)
Since then He Himself declared and said of the Bread, This is My Body, who shall dare to doubt any longer? And since He has Himself affirmed and said, This is My Blood, who shall ever hesitate, saying, that it is not His blood?
Cyril of Jerusalem Catechetical Lecture 23 par 3 (315-386 ad)
Wherefore with full assurance let us partake as of the Body and Blood of Christ: for in the figure of Bread is given to thee His Body, and in the figure of Wine His Blood; that thou by partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ, mayest be made of the same body and the same blood with Him. For thus we come to bear Christ in us, because His Body and Blood are distributed through our members; thus it is that, according to the blessed Peter, we became partakers of the divine nature.
Gregory of Nyssa On the Baptism of Christ (325-386 ad)
The bread again is at first common bread, but when the sacramental action consecrates it, it is called, and becomes, the Body of Christ.
Ambrose The Mysteries ch 10.50-52 (340-397 ad)
50Perhaps you will say, “I see something else, how is it that you assert that I receive the Body of Christ?” And this is the point which remains for us to prove. And what evidence shall we make use of? Let us prove that this is not what nature made, but what the blessing consecrated, and the power of blessing is greater than that of nature, because by blessing nature itself is changed.
52 We observe, then, that grace has more power than nature, and yet so far we have only spoken of the grace of a prophet’s blessing. But if the blessing of man had such power as to change nature, what are we to say of that divine consecration where the very words of the Lord and Saviour operate? For that sacrament which you receive is made what it is by the word of Christ. But if the word of Elijah had such power as to bring down fire from heaven, shall not the word of Christ have power to change the nature of the elements? You read concerning the making of the whole world: “He spake and they were made, He commanded and they were created.” Shall not the word of Christ, which was able to make out of nothing that which was not, be able to change things which already are into what they were not? For it is not less to give a new nature to things than to change them.
1John 2:
[1] My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
[2] And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
[3] And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
[4] He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
[5] But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
[6] He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.
[7] Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.
The word which was heard from the beginning, Torah, is no longer heard in any organized church.
That is why we are called out of the whore and her protestant daughters.
.
Bookmarking...
I’m a former RC, but Salavation thru Christ and His Finished Work is for everybody!
Christiandom is apostate as hell and dying worldwide and here we are fighting over this stuff?
.
But you did not answer the question fully! I provided what you left out.
>> “whether it was artos or azymos, and what the implications of that might be.” <<
What does the word say?
This is the subject if the full truth is what we desire.
Ah, so it is the GLORIFIED blood of Christ that they drink.
Except flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven, and Jesus' blood was poured out for the atonement, so it is in Him no longer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.