Interesting turn of phrase though I think I've heard this somewhere before ... oh yes I remember now.
Posted on 04/04/2015 12:46:43 PM PDT by RnMomof7
ELCA is LINO. The other American synods (LCMS, WELS, ALC, etc.) disagree on polity, but very little on doctrine, and all of them accept the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. (Full disclosure: I am LCMS.)
No, the interpretation of it by the slanderous who have no interest in truth. This is not something reasonable people do. And slander originates with the Father of Lies, whose use of "reason" is a wicked mockery of it.
Catholic or Protestant, literal or symbolic, it always suggested cannibalism to me.
No thanks.
First, one must not separate the sacrifice of our Lord on the cross from the events which surround it. The sacrifice of our Lord is inseparably linked to the Last Supper. Here Jesus took bread and wine. Looking to St. Matthew's text (26:26ff), He said over the bread, "Take this and eat it. This is My body"; and over the cup of wine, "This is My blood, the blood of the covenant, to be poured out on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins."The next day, on Good Friday, our Lord's body hung on the altar of the cross and His precious blood was spilt to wash away our sins and seal the everlasting, perfect covenant. The divine life our Lord offered and shared for our salvation in the sacrifice of Good Friday is the same offered and shared at the Last Supper. The Last Supper, the sacrifice of Good Friday and the Resurrection on Easter form one saving event.
[Remember that Jesus did not "drink of the cup" at he Last Supper. When He drank from the wine-soaked sponge just before His death, He said, "it is finished." In at least one sense, Jesus was speaking of the Passover meal (or Last Supper), which is considered finished when all have drunk from the fourth and last cup.]
4th Cup - The fourth part is the climax of the meal where they would conclude with several more prayers, and then they would sing the "Great Hallel", which was Psalms 114-118. Then they would drink the fourth cup of wine and the presiding priest would say the words, "TEL TELESTI" which means "IT IS FINISHED" or "IT IS CONSUMATED". The meal is completed.Second, one must have a nuanced understanding of time. One must distinguish chronological time from kairotic time, as found in sacred Scripture. In the Bible, chronos refers to chronological time—past, present and future—specific deeds which have an end point. Kairos, or kairotic time, refers to God's eternal time, time of the present moment which recapitulates the entire past as well as contains the entire future. Therefore, while our Lord's saving event occurred chronologically around the year AD 30-33, in the kairotic sense of time it is an ever-present reality which touches our lives here and now. In the same sense, this is why through baptism we share now in the mystery of Christ's passion, death and resurrection, a chronological event that happened almost 1,965 years ago, but is still efficacious for us today.
With this in mind, we also remember that our Lord commanded, as recorded in the Gospel of St. Luke (22:14ff) and St. Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians (11:23ff), "Do this in remembrance of Me." Clearly our Lord wanted the faithful to repeat, to participate in and to share in this sacramental mystery. The Last Supper, which is inseparably linked to Good Friday (and the Resurrection), is perpetuated in the holy Mass for time eternal.
The Mass therefore is a memorial. In each of the Eucharistic prayers, the , or memorial, follows the consecration, whereby we call to mind the passion, death, resurrection and ascension of our Lord. However, this memorial is not simply a recollection of past history in chronological time, but rather a liturgical proclamation of living history, of an event that continues to live and touch our lives now in that sense of kairotic time.
Just as good orthodox Jews truly live the Passover event when celebrating the Passover liturgy, plunging themselves into an event which occurred about 1,200 years before our Lord, we too live Christ's saving event in celebrating the Mass. The sacrifice which Christ made for our salvation remains an ever-present reality: "As often as the sacrifice of the cross by which 'Christ our Pasch is sacrificed' is celebrated on the altar, the work of our redemption is carried out" ("Lumen Gentium," No. 3). Therefore, the , "The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is a memorial and because it applies its fruit" (No. 1366). Therefore, the actual sacrifice of Christ on the cross and the sacrifice of the Mass are inseparably united as one single sacrifice. The Council of Trent in response to Protestant objections decreed, "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered Himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different," and "In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered Himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner." For this reason, just as Christ washed away our sins with his blood on the altar of the cross, the sacrifice of the Mass is also truly propitiatory. The Lord grants grace and the gift of repentance. He pardons wrong-doings and sins. (cf. Council of Trent, "Doctrine on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass")
Interesting turn of phrase though I think I've heard this somewhere before ... oh yes I remember now.
It's interesting that John 6:66 is the only place in the Gospels where a group of believers walked away from Jesus and did not follow Him again. He did not go after them to tell them He was only speaking figuratively, but let them go. He really did mean what He was saying about his Body and Blood.
Oh good! Here it is Easter, Christianity is under attack on all fronts, succoured by anti-Christian governments, out to destroy faith in Jesus. A time when Christians need to ‘circle the wagons’, yet here we are tearing each other apart with the most vicious words. Congrats folks, satan is laughing! He doesn’t need to do anything to destroy Christianity, just leave it to Christians to destroy each other!
How is it that in poor countries, people of faith can work the together, regardless of being Roman Catholic or Protestant, to further the Kingdom, yet in the wealthy Western world, we work to destroy each other? ALL Christians believe that it is by GRACE that we are saved. Can we ‘keep’ grace or is it something we are to SHARE? I think we all know the answer. During this most holy period, let’s share that grace, starting with EACH OTHER!
It's very difficult to understand the idea of "transubstantiation" (change of substance) without understanding Aristotle's insight into substance and accidents.
This is really worth a read.
Substance and AccidentsThis explains how it is logically possible for God to miraculously change the substance of a thing while the thing's accidents could remain unchanged.First, as a kind of preliminary and as tool for philosophical discourse, one should be familiar with the basic distinctions of Aristotle's logic. The basic logical distinction for our purposes is between accident (what exists in and is said of another) and substance (what does not exist in another & not said of another). As an example of what Aristotle means, consider what is named by the word "white." The reality that this word names (a particular color) can be said of some other thing as eg. "This thing is white." "White" is said of "this thing" as though the color belonged to "this thing." Furthermore, it is understood to exist in "this thing;" one does not find any "white" except that is in "this thing" or some other thing. This way of speaking can be contrasted with another, as for example "This thing is Socrates." "Socrates" does not name the same kind of reality that "white" does in the previous example. "Socrates" is not said of "this thing" in the same way as "white" is, and "Socrates" does not exist IN "this thing." Rather, "Socreates" IS "this thing," and the sentence "this thing is Socrates" is understood to assert an identity between the two realities named.
This basic notion of Aristotle's logic reflects the basic distinction in the way reality is stuctured and reflects the basic way that we view reality. The fundamental distinction is between substance and accident. Substance is whatever is a natural kind of thing and exists in its own right. Examples are rocks, trees, animals, etc. What an animal is, a dog for example, is basically the same whether it is black or brown, here or there, etc. A dog is a substance since it exists in its own right; it does not exist in something else, the way a color does.
Accidents are the modifications that substance undergo, but that do not change the kind of thing that each substance is. Accidents only exist when they are the accidents of some substance. Examples are colors, weight, motion. For Aristotle there are 10 categories into which things naturally fall. They are
•Substance, and
•Nine Accidents:
◦Quantity,
◦Quality,
◦Relation,
◦Action,
◦Passion,
◦Time,
◦Place,
◦Disposition (the arrangement of parts), and
◦Rainment (whether a thing is dressed or armed, etc.)All these distinctions are basically logical, but in a sense they reflect the structure of reality. One never finds any substance that we experience without some accidents, nor an accident that is not the accident of a substance. Every dog, for instance, has some color, place, size. Nevertheless, it is obvious that what a dog is is not the same as its color, or its size, etc.
We have an anti-Catholic group on FreeRepublic who think the greatest issue today is Catholicism. They want to spend their time bashing Catholic instead of finding common ground in Christ. They’re sincere in their anti-Catholicism and dedicated to it. With all the problems for Christians in the world, they’re feel this is the important one.
Thank you.
In all my years, and they are many, I have never spent any time trying to prove other religions wrong.I just walk with Christ in the Catholic Church and love my neighbor.I wonder if one were to sit down and ask the Lord, “How should I spend this day?” He probably wouldn’t say: “Get out there and prove those people wrong.”
How does one find time to pray with all this proving?
And you can’t present anything but a veiled implication? Any credibility you had is gone.
Hoss
Don’t feed the troll.
Bla bls bla. Another boring attempt to explain Protestant heresy.
That reads like pagan mysticism.
And you cannot present anything.
Good post. I refuse to be drawn anymore into these marathon arguments over doctrine, most of which are started by the same handful of anti-Catholics who patrol this site 24 hours a day. I made that mistake a few years ago and spent untold hours presenting clear Catholic teaching and refuting these people and their ignorant and poorly reasoned attacks. Hopeless, because they’re not listening, but only attacking.
There was even a thread that grew to some 40,000 posts (!) over the course of several weeks. The same arguments, the same refutations, over and over and over again, to no avail. There have been many hundreds of similar threads and many thousands of posts. What’s the point? The protestants here haven’t moved a millimeter from their anti-Catholic animus.
I also wonder if even a hundred people are reading this forum right now. I for one have better things to do on this holy weekend, so I’ll say “Happy Easter” to one and all.
Thank you for posting those
They have no idea that when they complain about Obama using Alinsky techniques to shut up the opposition, they are doing the exact same thing. They should read through the Rules and get a life.
You do know that it’s not just “Rome”, don’t you? It’s Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, Moscow, and Canterbury, too. It’s the overwhelming majority of all Christians throughout all time and space.
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.