Posted on 05/26/2008 4:50:16 AM PDT by NYer
The Catholic Church teaches that in the Eucharist, the wafer and the wine really become the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Have you ever met anyone who finds this a bit hard to take?
If so, you shouldn’t be surprised. When Jesus spoke about eating His flesh and drinking His blood in John 6, the response was less than enthusiastic. “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” (v. 52). “This is a hard saying who can listen to it?” (v.60). In fact so many of His disciples abandoned Him that Jesus asked the twelve if they also planned to quit. Note that Jesus did not run after the deserters saying, “Come back! I was just speaking metaphorically!”
It’s intriguing that one charge the pagan Romans lodged against Christians was that of cannibalism. Why? They heard that this sect met weekly to eat flesh and drink human blood. Did the early Christians say: “Wait a minute, it’s only a symbol!”? Not at all. When explaining the Eucharist to the Emperor around 155 AD, St. Justin did not mince his words: “For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Sav-ior being incarnate by God’s word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the word of prayer which comes from him . . . is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus.”
Not till the Middle Ages did theologians really try to explain how Christ’s body and blood became present in the Eucharist. After a few theologians got it wrong, St. Thomas Aquinas came along and offered an explanation that became classic. In all change that we normally observe, he teaches, appearances change, but deep down, the essence of a thing stays the same. Example: If, in a fit of mid-life crisis, I traded my mini-van for a Ferrari, abandoned my wife and kids to be a tanned beach bum, bleached and spiked my hair, buffed up at the gym, and made a trip to the plastic surgeon, I’d look a lot different. But for all my trouble, deep down I’d still substantially be the same confused, middle-aged dude as when I started.
St. Thomas said the Eucharist is the one change we encounter that is exactly the opposite. The appearances of bread and wine stay the same, but the very essence of these realities, which can’t be viewed by a microscope, is totally transformed. What starts as bread and wine becomes Christ’s body and blood. A handy word was coined to describe this unique change. Transformation of the “sub-stance”, what “stands-under” the surface, came to be called “transubstantiation.”
What makes this happen? The Spirit and the Word. After praying for the Holy Spirit to come (epiklesis), the priest, who stands in the place of Christ, repeats the words of the God-man: “This is my Body, This is my Blood.” Sounds like Genesis 1 to me: the mighty wind (read “Spirit”) whips over the surface of the water and God’s Word resounds. “Let there be light” and there was light. It is no harder to believe in the Eucharist than to believe in Creation.
But why did Jesus arrange for this transformation of bread and wine? Because He intended another kind of transformation. The bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ which are, in turn, meant to transform us. Ever hear the phrase: “you are what you eat?” The Lord desires us to be transformed from a motley crew of imperfect individuals into the Body of Christ, come to full stature.
Our evangelical brethren speak often of an intimate, personal relationship with Jesus. But I ask you, how much more personal and intimate than the Eucharist can you get? We receive the Lord’s body into our physical body that we may become Him whom we receive!
Such an awesome gift deserves its own feast. And that’s why, back in the days of Thomas Aquinas and St. Francis of Assisi, the Pope decided to institute the Feast of Corpus Christi.
Who needs to go to the Colosseum, when you can go to a “religious” thread and witness the spectacle of Christians eating each other?
Who are they going to judge???
I would agree with Luther if he removed it. ;)
I see the smiley, but if we say "sola scriptura" and then we use some notion of a belief to say what Scriptura is, it's no longer sola scriptura. (This is admittedly sort of pro forma.)
I would think God encourages the communion of the saints — the coming together of Christians for worship and fellowship. But, that may be a different description of saints than to which you refer.
Yes. We'd include all the saints, not just the ones who have not yet fallen asleep.
I know Alex, for $500 What is "The talent competition"? Who is "Miss Congeniality"?
Of course not? That's it? Just "of course not?"
Becasue what WAS written is all we need...It's complete... All you have to do is BELIEVE what He had the Apostles write...
None of the passages you quote say that nothing else is necessary. Sola scriptura is not biblical.
Now who's being gullible?
As for the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano, the claim that since some objects are found to be real flesh and blood, this somehow proves that a miracle occurred 1300 years ago, just shows how incredibly gullible many people are.
Some objects? The "objects" in question were a validly consecrated host and a chalice filled with wine. You quit the thread before seeing this post.
Gullible? You have no problem believing that Jesus Christ is God but don't believe what He said. Either He spoke the Truth or He lied. Which is it?
I’d agree to that stipulation.
“Elijah and Moses appeared and conversed with Christ. He didn’t pray to them.That may be a distinction without a difference. Are you saying we can communicate with the saints but we can’t ask them to pray for us?”
No... I’m not saying that we can communicate with “the saints.” We pray to God. We don’t pray to saints. Why pray to the saints to pray for us when we can pray directly to God himself???
As for Sola Scriptura, that issue will be argued from now until Kingdom come.
Hoss
And in what third-party, objective publications was this project validated? Anyone can claim to have done something and self-publish it. If the only evidence of this scientific validation is the claim of the participants, it has less supporting it than the occasional cold-fusion breakthrough claims.
Gospel of John, chapter six. It’s all there.
It certainly seems that way at times but most of these spectacles are nothing more than miscommunication. Words have meaning but they oftentimes have different meanings; hence the misunderstandings. These threads offer an opportunity to clarify what we believe and, hopefully, agree upon a common understanding.
The first and second century christians were persecuted by being covered with pitch and set ablaze to light the Colosseum. Today, with crude prices on the rise, that would prove too costly ;-)
May the Holy Spirit guide you safely home.
Jesus NEVER commanded His disciples to write anything down. In fact, other than what He scribbled in the sand, He himself did not write anything down. Mark 13:31 tells us that heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus' Word will not pass away. But Jesus never says anything about His Word being entirely committed to a book. Also, it took 400 years to compile the Bible, and another 1,000 years to invent the printing press. How was the Word of God communicated? Orally, by the bishops of the Church, with the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:42 provides a glimpse into how the members obeyed apostolic tradition (doctrine, prayers, and the breaking of bread). Their obedience was not to the Scriptures alone. Tradition (in Greek, "paradosis") means "to hand on" teaching. And in John 17:20, Jesus prays for all who believe in Him through the oral word of the apostles. Jesus protects oral apostolic teaching.
Not everything was written down and some of what was written conflicts with itself - ex: the various accounts of the Sermon on the Mount. This is yet one more example of why Sola Scriptura does not work.
Thank you. As is usual your insight is right on the mark and can only be refuted with false information and lies. In other words what you present is irrefutable truth.
The Book of Maccabees? By what authority did he remove books from the Canon? His own? If so, then any of may choose to accept or reject books from Scripture.
According to Scripture, Christ wanted us to be one (John 17:22-23). We are all as a Church to be of one mind and to think the same (Philippians 2:2; Romans 15:5). There is only to be one "faith" (Ephesians 4:3-6), not many. For the Church is Christ's Body and Christ only had one Body, not many. Also, since the Church is Christ's Bride (Ephesians 5:29), can Christ be married to more than one wife (essentially a spiritual form of the the sin of polygamy)? No, Christ can only have one wife (i.e., one Church, not many).
I wouldn't base the argument on need, and you know that el standardo answer that we ask others to pray for us, while it's not clear that we need to (though we seem to be told to pray for others.)
The Meal of Melchizedek (what is meant by Christ’s words, "This is my body; this is my blood")
The Eucharist: The Lord's Supper
This is My Body, This is My Blood
Pope Benedict--Jesus' Incarnation and Presence in the Eucharist confounds the wisdom of men
Pope leads Corpus Christi observance
Day 37 of Pope Benedict XV's Reign - Feast of Corpus Christi
Feast of Corpus Christi - Sacrifice, Fellowship Meal or Real Presence?
The Eucharist and the Mystery of Fatherly Love
The Consecrated Host truly is the Bread of Heaven
Corpus Christi Around the World
Homily of Pope Benedict XVI for the Feast of Corpus Christi
Back to the Future: Reviving Corpus Christi Processions
The Banquet of Corpus Christi - "Why did Jesus give us His Body and Blood?"
A Reflection on Corpus Christi
Pope Leads Corpus Christi Procession - "We Entrust These Streets to His Goodness"
Corpus Christi celebrations in Poland (gallery)
HOMILIES PREACHED BY FATHER ALTIER ON CORPUS CHRISTI SUNDAY FROM 2001-2005
Nyer, Oh I understand and I agree. But trying to prove that a Baptist style church existed before the Reformation is a twisted abuse of history and only makes those who argue for this look like fools.
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.