Posted on 07/23/2016 9:19:23 AM PDT by Salvation
Eucharist in the creed?
Msgr. Charles Pope
Question: The true presence of Christ in the Eucharist is central to our Catholic faith, and many converts say it was essential to their conversion. If this is so, why is the true presence not mentioned at all in the Nicene or Apostles Creeds? Should it not be added at the end where we state things like our belief in the Communion of Saints, the resurrection of the body and so forth? — Jerry Roventini, via email
Answer: There are many things that are not mentioned in the Nicene Creed. There is no mention of the Ten Commandments or grace; neither are we told what books belong to the New Testament or that we should care for the poor, etc. The creed is not a catechism; it is a statement of certain key doctrines that were disputed at the time of its composition in the fourth century.
The creed was composed in response to debates about the divinity of Jesus Christ and the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. While there are a few concluding statements related to ecclesiology and eschatology, the Nicene Creed remains preeminently a statement of faith in the one God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The belief in the true presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist was not widely disputed at the time. And to the degree it was, the need to definitively teach on the divinity of Christ was an important foundation in order to establish his true presence in the Eucharist.
In the Sacred Liturgy, many signs and words indicate the Real Presence. The words of the consecration, which are Jesus’ own words, say, “This is my body … my blood.” The priest later says, “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.” There are also signs of the Real Presence in our reverence of kneeling and genuflecting. And, as Communion is distributed, there is the simple creedal declaration and response: “The body of Christ. Amen.” Therefore, in the wider liturgy of the Mass and devotions such as adoration, the Church proclaims her belief in the True Presence.
While it would not intrinsically hurt to add to the Nicene Creed, one might wonder where it would stop. Further, since the creed is shared by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, adding to the ancient creed might harm attempts at unity.
Pope Paul VI wrote a longer “Credo of the People of God” which does speak to the Eucharistic presence, but it is too long to recite at Mass.
By word of mouth, eh?
Then it must be true.
Well, yeah, but you have made other poor decisions in the past so your credibility is in doubt.
REVOLUTION, you mean....reformations are made from within...
reformations are made from within...
That was the original goal. The scales didn’t fall off of the Popes eyes so the true church continued outside Catholicism.
Great article
Where is that Church? Calvin, Luther, Zwingli, Jimmy Swaggart, Pat Robinson? It was also Revolution, not reformation.
I disagree bro. The WORST decision I ever made, was to stay in the Catholic Church for as long as I did. The BEST decision I ever made, was to joyously, wonderfully, and eternally leave the Catholic Church. Now, I am blessed to be a non Catholic. Now, I don't have to worry about bluffing my way into Heaven. Good luck with that bro. You might need it.
“. The WORST decision I ever made, was to stay in the Catholic Church for as long as I did. The BEST decision I ever made, was to joyously, wonderfully, and eternally leave the Catholic Church. “
And come to Christ alone, apart from our own efforts for eternal life.
Affirmarive sir. Once I realized I couldn't "attain" salvation, the only choice left, was TRUE faith in Christ.
Maybe most people don't see it, because they are too busy trying to establish their own righteousness. Good luck with that, but it won't cut the mustard. 😇
Everywhere the Gospel is clearly proclaimed.
Affirmarive sir. It's not brain surgery. In fact, God made it extremely simple. I don't know why people make it so hard. Maybe it's just human pride.
Even the Catholic Mass denigrates The Grace of God, by asserting that human priests can bring The Christ from Heaven so the Priest can offer Him continually, in direct contradiction to what GOD has told you.
So, it takes a revolution to set aside the blasphemies and heresies at the heart of catholiciism. If YOU could earn God's Grace it is no more Grace but wages. Your religion trains you to work for what GOD offers by faith, as HIS GIFT which Glorifies Jesus, not you or your priesthood or your Pope, or your cathedrals, or your rituals. Count your Rosary beads and recite chants, light candles and attend Mass faithfull, seclude yourself in the confessional regularly, but whatever you do you are trying to work your way to be worthy of GOD'S Grace ... and those doing such will die in their sinful state and miss the Grace hidden from them through exploiting their penchant for fidelity. Fidelity to an organization is the wide road leading into the broad gate. Fidelity to the organization continuously pricks your deepest pride in self. That is an obscenity next to the sacrifice GOD made for you on the Cross, ONCE for ALL forever.
Certainly the various divisions due to following men you refer to are not the ideal now then they were in the 1st century, when believers were thinking of men above that which is written, (1Co. 4:6) which Rome and cults esp. manifest. And lacking the manifest apostles who established their Truth claims upon Scriptural substantiation in word and in power, under which the 1st c. church realized its unity then the divisions of today can be seen as a form of judgment, requiring further reformation. Esp. from the deformation that is Catholicism.
Yet despite this the greatest spiritual unity of major groups is found among those who most strongly hold to the most basic distinctive of the Reformation, that of holding to Scripture to be the wholly inspired, accurate and basically literal word of God, in stark contrast to those whom Rome counts and treats as its members. Which include pro-abortion, prohomosexual public figures, whom you must own as brethren.
And a brief course of the history of Rome should be enough to evidence that her type of unity is not Scriptural, and that due to the one duty being to simply follow the pastors, then when they go South then so do those who follow them, and can even result in extreme disunity.
As early as the 4th c. you have pope Damasus 1 employing murderous thugs in seeking to ensure to seat from his rival, and a litany of unholy popes and political elections and assimlation of false beliefs and practices, and conditions which preceded the needed, if faulty, Reformation:
Upon Pope Liberius's death September 24 A.D. 366, violent disorders broke out over the choice of a successor. A group who had remained consistently loyal to Liberius immediately elected his deacon Ursinus in the Julian basilica and had him consecrated Bishop, but the rival faction of Felix's adherence elected Damasus, who did not hesitate to consolidate his claim by hiring a gang of thugs, storming the Julian Basilica in carrying out a three-day massacre of the Ursinians... Damasus was now secure on his throne; but the bishops of Italy were shocked by the reports they received, and his moral authority was weakened for several years... .
Damasus was indefatigable in promoting the Roman primacy, frequently referring to Rome as 'the apostolic see' and ruling that the test of a creed's orthodoxy was its endorsement by the Pope.... This [false claim to] succession gave him a unique [presumptuous claim to] judicial power to bind and loose, and the assurance of this infused all his rulings on church discipline. ” Kelly, J. N. D. (1989). The Oxford Dictionary of Popes. USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 32,34;
Before (April 26, 1841) his conversion, the oft-invoked (by RCs) Newman confessed:
It never could be, that so large a portion of Christendom should have split off from the communion of Rome, and kept up a protest for 300 years for nothing. I think I never shall believe that so much piety and earnestness would be found among Protestants, if there were not some very grave errors on the side of Rome. To suppose the contrary is most unreal, and violates all one's notions of moral probabilities. All aberrations are founded on, and have their life in, some truth or other—and Protestantism, so widely spread and so long enduring, must have in it, and must be witness for, a great truth or much truth. That I am an advocate for Protestantism, you cannot suppose—but I am forced into a Via Media, short of Rome, as it is at present." (Part 6. History of My Religious Opinions)
After his conversion he found:
It does not seem possible, then, to avoid the conclusion that, whatever be the proper key for harmonizing the records and documents of the early and later Church, and true as the dictum of Vincentius [what the Church taught was believed always by everyone], must be considered in the abstract, and possible as its application might be in his own age, when he might almost ask the primitive centuries for their testimony, it is hardly available now, or effective of any satisfactory result. The solution it offers is as difficult as the original problem. — John Henry Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., reprinted 1927), p. 27.
In contrast to even RC papal propaganda, even Caths researchers, among others provide testimony against such, including Newman in explaining how the Peter of Scripture, the non-assertive, street-level initial leader among the 11, for whom no successors are promised, and to whom the NT church did not look to as the first of a line of exalted infallible heads reigning supreme in Rome, much less by RC voting, was become the Roman pope.
The conversion of Constantine had propelled the Bishops of Rome into the heart of the Roman establishment...They [bishops of Rome] set about [creating a Christian Rome] by building churches, converting the modest tituli (community church centres) into something grander, and creating new and more public foundations, though to begin with nothing that rivaled the great basilicas at the Lateran and St. Peter's...
These churches were a mark of the upbeat confidence of post-Constantinian Christianity in Rome. The popes were potentates, and began to behave like it. Damasus perfectly embodied this growing grandeur. An urbane career cleric like his predecessor Liberius, at home in the wealthy salons of the city, he was also a ruthless power-broker, and he did not he did not hesitate to mobilize both the city police and [a hired mob of gravediggers with pickaxes] to back up his rule¦
Self-consciously, the popes began to model their actions and their style as Christian leaders on the procedures of the Roman state.” - Eamon Duffy "Saints and Sinners", p. 37,38
While Apostles were on earth, there was the display neither of Bishop nor Pope; their power had no prominence, as being exercised by Apostles. In course of time, first the power of the Bishop displayed itself, and then the power of the Pope. . . . St. Peter's prerogative would remain a mere letter, till the complication of ecclesiastical matters became the cause of ascertaining it. . . . When the Church, then, was thrown upon her own resources, first local disturbances gave exercise to Bishops, and next ecumenical disturbances gave exercise to Popes; and whether communion with the Pope was necessary for Catholicity would not and could not be debated till a suspension of that communion had actually occurred¦ - (John Henry Newman, Essay on the Development of Doctrine, Notre Dame edition, pp. 165,166
In the course of the fourth century two movements or developments spread over the face of Christendom, with a rapidity characteristic of the Church; the one ascetic, the other ritual or ceremonial. We are told in various ways by Eusebius [Note 16], that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own. It is not necessary to go into a subject which the diligence of Protestant writers has made familiar to most of us.
The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church. {374} The introduction of Images was still later, and met with more opposition in the West than in the East. - John Henry Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, Chapter 8. Application of the Third Note of a True Development—Assimilative Power; www.newmanreader.org/works/development/chapter8.html
Later you had those times it seems so many RCs seem to long for.
...in the 1180s, the Church began to panic at the spread of heresy, and thereafter it took the lead from the State, though it maintained the legal fiction that convicted and unrepentant heretics were merely 'deprived of the protection of the Church', which was (as they termed it) 'relaxed', the civil power then being free to burn them without committing mortal sin. Relaxation was accompanied by a formal plea for mercy; in fact this was meaningless, and the individual civil officer (sheriffs and so forth) had no choice but to burn, since otherwise he was denounced as a 'defender of heretics', and plunged into the perils of the system himself. (Paul Johnson [Catholic), History of Christianity, © 1976 Athenium, p. 253)
Even later, referring to the schism of the 14th and 15th centuries, Cardinal Ratzinger observed,
"For nearly half a century, the Church was split into two or three obediences that excommunicated one another, so that every Catholic lived under excommunication by one pope or another, and, in the last analysis, no one could say with certainty which of the contenders had right on his side. The Church no longer offered certainty of salvation.
"It is against this background of a profoundly shaken ecclesial consciousness that we are to understand that Luther, in the conflict between his search for salvation and the tradition of the Church, ultimately came to experience the Church, not as the guarantor, but as the adversary of salvation. (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith for the Church of Rome, “Principles of Catholic Theology,” trans. by Sister Mary Frances McCarthy, S.N.D. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1989) p.196). http://www.whitehorseinn.org/blog/2012/06/13/whos-in-charge-here-the-illusions-of-church-infallibility/)
Cardinal Bellarmine:
"Some years before the rise of the Lutheran and Calvinistic heresy, according to the testimony of those who were then alive, there was almost an entire abandonment of equity in ecclesiastical judgments; in morals, no discipline; in sacred literature, no erudition; in divine things, no reverence; religion was almost extinct. (Concio XXVIII. Opp. Vi. 296- Colon 1617, in “A History of the Articles of Religion,” by Charles Hardwick, Cp. 1, p. 10,)
The result of following man is that those who do not essentially become as Protestants, ascertaining the veracity of church teaching by examination of the basis for it, and dissenting from what popes and prelate teach when they judge them as being in contradiction to their sources.
It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock...the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors. - VEHEMENTER NOS, an Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906.
to scrutinize the actions of a bishop, to criticize them, does not belong to individual Catholics, but concerns only those who, in the sacred hierarchy, have a superior power; above all, it concerns the Supreme Pontiff, for it is to him that Christ confided the care of feeding not only all the lambs, but even the sheep [cf. John 21:17]. - Est Sane Molestum (1888) Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII; http://www.novusordowatch.org/est-sane-molestum-leo-xiii.htm
To the shepherds alone was given all power to teach, to judge, to direct; on the faithful was imposed the duty of following their teaching, of submitting with docility to their judgment, and of allowing themselves to be governed, corrected, and guided by them in the way of salvation. Thus, it is an absolute necessity for the simple faithful to submit in mind and heart to their own pastors, and for the latter to submit with them to the Head and Supreme Pastor....
Similarly, it is to give proof of a submission which is far from sincere to set up some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them; and in some ways they resemble those who, on receiving a condemnation, would wish to appeal to a future council, or to a Pope who is better informed.
On this point what must be remembered is that in the government of the Church, except for the essential duties imposed on all Pontiffs by their apostolic office, each of them can adopt the attitude which he judges best according to times and circumstances. Of this he alone is the judge. It is true that for this he has not only special lights, but still more the knowledge of the needs and conditions of the whole of Christendom, for which, it is fitting, his apostolic care must provide. - Epistola Tua (1885), Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII; http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage_print.asp?number=403215&language=en
Not sure of your point - Just in the last several years, and throughout the history of evangelical protestantism, there is corruption that equals or goes beyond anything in the Catholic Church - the disgraceful fleecing via “1-800” numbers of elderly bank accounts to pay for high living is sad - and certainly not unique to the age. This goes to the basic non-understanding of what Our Lord taught through the Gospel’s - Man is fallen and in sin, but the Church, as the Bride of Christ, is not. It can’t be, it is a Church founded by Christ.
Now, to lapsed Catholics etc, this is a sad state of affairs, but a closer look will show you that those who accept the Church in their hearts are closer to the teachings than those “cultural Catholics” like Joe Biden.
In terms of Church history, again the State of Man appears, but as a Church, there was never any question. The comparison to the Church Fathers (whom many protestants are told not to read, akin to Jews being told not to read the New Testament) to the Revolutionaries making up their own religions like Luther, Zwingli, Calvin and thousands (thousands!) of other is just wrong. The Apostles Creed speaking for the Church dates to the time of St John, the Nicean Creed from the 4th Century, the Church speaking as one.
Finally, Blessed John Henry Newman is mentioned - in part because if you keep reading him, his brilliance and grace will lead you to the true Church. His sketches of the history of our shared faith will result in one unmistakable conclusion, that the Church is one, it is one Holy and Apostolic, alive today as it was then (despite the trauma) and sacramental. Once you don’t bother believing in the sacraments (i.e. what God does to us in baptism, eucharist, confession, confirmation, marriage, last rites, ordination) you are on a foundation of sand. The idea that luther instituted civil divorce is DIRECTLY related to the crisis of marriage now. And his desire to marry a nun, and Henry VIII’s desire to have sex with a young courtier, are hardly the basis of new religions and can be viewed as sad parodies of them.
“To be deep into history is to cease being a Protestant” - Blessed John Henry Newman
Really? Like the Catholic church never fleeced anyone with its sales of indulgences?
And all the other *Get out of hell/shorten your stay in purgatory* gimmicks that it has.
And paying for masses and lighting candles, and annulments, etc,.
And don't forget the whole priest thing...
So would you like to provide some evidence that throughout the history of evangelical protestantism, there is corruption that equals or goes beyond anything in the Catholic Church. Something verifiable?
Bad as fleecing people out of money, is that really WORSE than the molesting of children and concurrent cover up that occurred over the years.
Nobody FORCED those old people to give their money. They did it of their own volition. Bad as the lies and tactics are, they didn't HAVE to give. They gave because they wanted to.
In terms of Church history, again the State of Man appears, but as a Church, there was never any question. The comparison to the Church Fathers (whom many protestants are told not to read, akin to Jews being told not to read the New Testament) to the Revolutionaries making up their own religions like Luther, Zwingli, Calvin and thousands (thousands!) of other is just wrong.
Another *fact* with no basis. I ***NEVER*** heard of Protestants being told to not read the church fathers. On the contrary, here on this very forum are Christians whoa re MORE familiar with the church fathers than many Catholics.
Matter of fact, when I was growing up Catholic, I was not told to or encouraged to read the church fathers either. Once you don’t bother believing in the sacraments (i.e. what God does to us in baptism, eucharist, confession, confirmation, marriage, last rites, ordination) you are on a foundation of sand.
Actually, if you are depending on those things, you are on the sand. The ROCK is CHRIST, not sacraments or rituals.
The idea that luther instituted civil divorce is DIRECTLY related to the crisis of marriage now.
He did? Never heard that charge against him before. Care to site it?
And his desire to marry a nun, and Henry VIII’s desire to have sex with a young courtier, are hardly the basis of new religions and can be viewed as sad parodies of them.
Oh, the horror. he wanted to get married.
Well, after the church kicked him out, since when did it ever have any say in what he did?
And besides, by that you condemn other men who leave the priesthood to marry, and I know of one. And yes, he met a nun and they both left their orders to marry. Are you going to condemn them as well?
They are still faithfully practicing Catholics.
And what a gross misrepresentation of the basis for the rise of Protestantism. If you think that all of Protestantism revolves around Luther, you are sadly mistaken.
Christians follow Christ, not men.
You missed the point of the 1-800 fleece - the point is that abuses in the Early Church have no relevance to an argument of illegitimacy, as we such abuses and more in modern times in the so called “true Church” as you claim. (Although such definition seems like a lot of words but don’t make it any clearer. As for the Church Fathers, just take a look at Scott Hahn and his conversion, it is flat out false to say Evangelicals are encouraged to read the Church fathers and I’ve been on these boards, I have not seen anything of the sort except for the odd out of context quote. As Blessed Cardinal Henry Newman wrote about, it is a study of the Church Fathers that makes it impossible, assuming one is sincere, to believe the modern Protestant view of sacraments and the Eucharist.
“So he wanted to get married”? Well, nice thought, but perhaps Henry VIII’s faithful wife of 20 years disagreed, no? Civil divorce, the great beginning of Protestantism (Luther could have left the priesthood and married, but you know, we all like to have our cake and eat it too) is still reverberating now, affecting everything from the nuclear family to gay marriage.
Having said that, as Protestantism developed, you have to have great respect for many of its leaders and churches, especially how it grew in the United States. I would say, however, the fact that there are 30,000 denominations or more, and that within certain denominations (such as Methodists) there are huge chasms of disagreement, the idea that it is a Church is absurd. The Catholic Church, post-Vatican II, is heading down the same morass as the Protestants, and will most likely end up in the same sad place as the mainstream denominations, and have to rely on ad-hoc and fleeting man-centered preachers in the flavor of the day mega-church. Not good all around.
You are correct MM. I have known two priests who got married, and one nun. They are all ex Catholics now, like you and I are. I asked the ex nun how she came to know the truth. She said it was quite simple. She just picked up her Douay Rheims Catholic Bible and started reading it. What a novel concept. Read your Bible.
Me, on the other hand, I was an angry, rebellious Catholic. I didn't believe anything that anyone told me. When they told me I couldn't read the Bible on my own, that was like waving a red cape in front of a bull. The first thing I did, was read a Bible on my own. The rest, as they say, is history.
To be deep into the Bible, is to know what you believe, and why you believe it. I am sure I am not the only one who ever said that. 😀😆😄
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.