Posted on 12/27/2008 6:02:01 PM PST by Steelfish
Here's what one of the greatest Anglican converts to Catholicism and a towering intellectual and theologian of his time wrote:
Cardinal Newman, 1848: "To me, nothing is so consoling, so piercing, so thrilling, so overcoming, as the Mass, said as it is among us. I could attend Mass for ever, and not be tired. It is not a mere form of words, – it is a great action, the greatest action there can be on earth. It is not the invocation only, but, if I dare to use the word, the evocation of the Eternal. He becomes present on the altar in flesh and blood, before whom angels bow and devils tremble."
You wrote:
“That’s your ‘biblical evidence’???”
No. Yoou said “biblical...” - you never said anything about presenting biblical evidence. If you can make an assertion without evidence, why can’t I?
Maybe you should learn to read your own posts, huh?
“Nope...God could make me the owner of the company I work for...God could turn Michigan into an Island Paradise...But He ain’t gonna do it...”
Oh? And why would that be and how do you know that? Does your brand of sola scriptura deny miracles, I?
And God never told you He would turn a cracker into Himself...
But, I, He tells me this every Sunday in a liturgy unchanged for 1700 years, based on a liturgy from the 1st century and completely consistent with the Eucharistic theology of The Church from before 100 AD, more than 200 years before the canon of the NT upon which you base ALL your beliefs was defined...by people who believed EXACTLY what Vlad and b o f and I believe.
Your denial of the Real Presence in the Eucharist has no basis in 2000 years of Christian theology, at least as The Church sees it. You can pound that bible and quote those texts until the cows come home, but you cannot get beyond the historical fact that the Fathers who put that canon together would, were they here today, condemn you as a heretic. I will give you this, the “Lord’s Suppers” and “communions” of the Christian ecclesial groups outside The Church are indeed devoid of the Real Presence. That communion really is just bread and wine...or grape juice.
“And you can’t offer the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ to God...HE OFFERED IT TO YOU...”
Really? And here all along I thought you Westerners worshiped a God Whose wrath was slaked only by the bloody slaughter of His perfectly innocent Son!
That’s gonna’ leave a mark!
The “Fathers who put the canon together would, were they here today, condemn you as a heretic,” for claiming that the Sun orbited the Earth.
Ooops. You know what I meant.
Would seem to me that if something is biblical, it has to be evident in the bible...Apparently you operate differently...
You wrote:
“Would seem to me that if something is biblical, it has to be evident in the bible...Apparently you operate differently...”
Would seem to me that if someone asked for evidence, that request actually would have been in his post...Apparently you failed to do that.
You wrote:
“Ooops. You know what I meant.”
No, actually I don’t.
1) Can you offer any evidence that the Fathers issued dogmatic teachings on astronomy?
2) Can you offer any reason why dogmatic statements from the Fathers on astronomy would effect dogmatic statements on the Real Presence?
Really?
Yes, Really...
I'll post it again...Here are the words and scripture reference you guys use in your Eucharistic prayer:
Priest: In memory of his death and resurrection, we offer you, Father, this life-giving bread, this saving cup. (John 6:51)
Now compare John 6:51 in the scriptures...
Joh 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. (6:52) If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world.
And this is from your own Catholic, Saint Jerome...
Jesus gave the Sacrifice...Jesus offered the flesh and blood...Your priests nor your church are involved except in receiving it...You can not offer it to God...He offers it to you...
Now, can you address THAT instead of rambling on about what your church has taught for thousands of years???
Well then let me make my point more plainly, and that is to say that the “Fathers” were not infallible then, just as there are none who are infallible today. To say something is true only because the “Fathers” of 2,000 years ago deemed it so is circular reasoning at best.
Oh, that’s an easy question.
At the time in the mass the priest says: “In memory of his death and resurrection ...etc etc “ it is bread and wine, and not yet the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
“Now, can you address THAT instead of rambling on about what your church has taught for thousands of years???”
Sure...the Fathers who established the canon of the NT, including John, believed what I believe, not what you believe. In fact, no Christian believed what you believe until about 500 years ago...and those people went to great lengths to disagree with anything Rome believed so their sincerity must be questioned.
But I’ll tell you what, read Homily XLVI on John by +John Chrysostomos. He specifically addresses this very verse in the 4th century.
“The “Fathers who put the canon together would, were they here today, condemn you as a heretic,” for claiming that the Sun orbited the Earth.”
Ummmm, no they probably would not have done that. The Fathers weren’t concerned with such matters. You’re thinking of some popes more than 1000 years later who likely would indeed have called me a heretic, and not only for believing the earth orbited the sun.
All you are doing is repeating what your church taught you...You can’t respond to plain scripture???
You wrote:
“Well then let me make my point more plainly, and that is to say that the “Fathers” were not infallible then, just as there are none who are infallible today.”
Your point is meaningless. At least once today you will be infallibly correct. Say, “The earth is not flat,” and you will be infallibly correct. You won’t be an infallible man, but you will be infallible in your statement. So, your point that they are not infallible is simply meaningless. You’re saying nothing.
“To say something is true only because the “Fathers” of 2,000 years ago deemed it so is circular reasoning at best.”
It is not circular reasoning at all. It is common sense. If you find that the overwhelming number of Founding Fathers say the 2nd Amendment meant individual weapons ownership tells us what those Founding Fathers INTENDED with the 2nd Amendment. That’s important. In the same way, the Early Church Fathers tell us what was intended with the NT and early teachings of the Church. And that’s not circular reasoning. I guess you don’t believe in “original intent” interpretation of the US Comstitution either, right? Because you wouldn’t want to be a hyporcrite and contradictory, right?
“All you are doing is repeating what your church taught you...You can’t respond to plain scripture???”
I, of course that’s what I am saying. The only reason you read what you read for scripture, except for a few amendments made by Luther, is because “my church” decided that’s what you’d read. The only scripture is what The Church says is scripture and it only means what The Church says it means. And The Church made those decisions by measuring what was passing for scripture 1700 years ago against what The Church then and now believes. Its really that simple, I. Reading scripture outside the context and guidance of The Church is a hit or miss proposition and given the fallen state of the world, more likely to be miss than hit.
For example, you have doubtless heard of that woman who was elected heresiarch in chief of the Episcopal Church. Her agitation for gay marriage and sermonizing that Christ is only “one of the ways” to God are she insists, biblically based and that although her interpretations of scripture are innovative, unheard of in 2000 years of Christianity, nevertheless “the Holy Spirit is doing a new thing” and has guided her organization to become a “prophetic voice” in the modern world. This is where reading scripture without reference to what The Church believes inevitably leads... to error and spiritual death.
For example, you have doubtless heard of that woman who was elected heresiarch in chief of the Episcopal Church.
This is where reading scripture without reference to what The Church believes inevitably leads... to error and spiritual death.
Her problem is the same as many churches, including yours...PRIVATE INTERPRETATION...God is the interpreter...Not your church...Not thru your church...
I, of course that’s what I am saying. The only reason you read what you read for scripture, except for a few amendments made by Luther, is because “my church” decided that’s what you’d read.
Another mistake on your part...The scripture I read doesn't come from your church...Never did... And the OT I read is what God gave the Jews, long before your church showed up...And the Jews already had the canon of their scriptures down pat...
Your church has fed you a big line...
The only scripture is what The Church says is scripture and it only means what The Church says it means.
Interesting statement when it's clear that when people study the scriptures for themselves, even if they don't get it all right, they leave your church in droves...People that study the scriptures have found that what your church claims is truth doesn't jive with the written word of God...
Oh, and btw, your church didn't author the scriptures...God authored the scriptures and God said He would preserve them...He didn't consult with your church...
“Her problem is the same as many churches, including yours...PRIVATE INTERPRETATION...God is the interpreter...Not your church...Not thru your church...”
Where did you get this idea from? Did God tell you?
“The scripture I read doesn’t come from your church...Never did...”
Of course it does. The Church established from among the contending versions of scripture what was “orthodox” and what wasn’t; what is in the canon and what isn’t. The “Old Testament”, like the New is a product of The Church and neither of the Jews nor of some American ecclesial group of dubious lineage. That’s not Eastern mysticism nor Roman legalism; its just an historical fact.
“Interesting statement when it’s clear that when people study the scriptures for themselves, even if they don’t get it all right, they leave your church in droves...”
Ummmmm, Orthodoxy, like Roman Catholicism, is growing. What is dying are the Western, post Enlightenment, ecclesial groups, at least as recognizable institutions, though its certainly true that in America anybody can open a “church”, bring in a few barrels of snakes and claim to preach God’s word. Most of the Christian world thinks that’s either pretty silly or a sort of dangerous Christian taliban.
“Oh, and btw, your church didn’t author the scriptures...God authored the scriptures and God said He would preserve them...”
Oh, gee, I, there you go again confusing Christianity with Mohammedanism. Its the Mohammedans who think God wrote the Koran, not Christians who think He wrote the Bible. Nevertheless you are correct that The Church did not author the Bible, but it certainly was the “editor” who put it all together to advance a very specific set of beliefs which are quite different from those you seem to adhere to.
In terms of biblical references, there are many, starting back in the OT- from the Pascal Lamb/Passover in Egypt and the manna in Exodus; a few more elsewhere that escape me right now.
The tough passage is John Chapter 6, roughly verse 35 to the end of the chapter. Jesus said “unless you eat my body and drink my blood you cannot have life within you”. Jesus let many disciples walk away; even asked Peter “will you leave also?”...
Pretty strong stuff. Jesus was pretty clear, as he said the same thing several times.
Luke 22:19 is the Last Supper; where Jesus gives Himself to the apostles under the form of bread and wine, and tells them to do likewise. It's in the other gospels also.
Catholics believe that Jesus loves us so much that He wanted to remain with us until the end of the world. He would have remained suspended on that cross to stay with us, but would have then been limited to one dark corner of the planet. In the Eucharist, He is where we are, all over the world. Reminds one of the multiplication of the loaves and fish, another prophecy of the Eucharist.
>>But the miracle of transubstantiation is what matters.<<
I’ll be blunt here. The transubstantiation is the most creepy and unbiblical part of Catholicism.
Lot of good stuff there, but trans... is not one of them.
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.