Posted on 06/13/2009 5:00:57 PM PDT by bdeaner
Many Catholics and non-Catholics alike think that the Roman Catholic Church invented the doctrine of transubstantiation. Transubstantiation means that the bread and wine presented on the altar at the Mass become the the Body and Blood of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit at the consecration. The consecration is the time when the priest calls upon the Holy Spirit to change the bread and wine into Christ's Body and Blood. However, the Body and Blood retain the appearance of bread and wine. The Roman Catholic Church, that is, the Latin Rite Catholic Church, and other Catholic Churches in communion with Rome believe that the Eucharist is the Real Presence of Jesus Christ, body, blood, soul and divinity. The Orthodox Churches and most other Churches of the East do so as well. Anglican [Episcopalian] and other Protestant denominations have interpreted Christ's presence at the celebration of the Lord's Supper or Eucharist to be either only spiritual, or symbolic, or non-existent.
Thus, I decided to research what the Early Christians believed on this issue. I searched the indices for "Eucharist" in many volume sets on Early Christian writings, and I was astonished at my discovery. The Early Christians actually took the Real Presence for granted. It doesn't even seem as if there was much debate. I could not find anyone who denied the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament before the year 500 A.D. Following are the results of my search. Some Christians, e.g. St. Augustine, had very much to say about the Real Presence of Our Lord, so I did not include everything. Also, I want you to know that I did not include other Christians who believed in the Real Presence in this article because they later fell away from the Church for different reasons. Therefore, even though these Christians defended the Real Presence, e.g. Origen, Tertullian, Theodore of Mopsuetta, etc., I did not include their statements.
I pray that this research article will inspire lukewarm Catholics to become excited about their Faith which has faithfully been passed on for over 2000 years. I pray that the Holy Spirit will grant you Faith to believe in Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament and to receive Him at Mass and visit Him in the tabernacle. He is patiently waiting for you because he loves you and wants you to come home.
Also, I pray that this research article will motivate non-Catholics to ask questions about the Blessed Sacrament to learn more. Our Lord is still with us in the flesh, and He is awesome! I pray that someday you will be able to experience the joy of receiving Him in the Mass and of praying at his feet.
THE BIBLE
"The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread."
-1 Cor. 10:16-17
"For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, 'This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.' In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.' For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord."
-1 Cor. 11:23-27
THE DIDACHE
The Didache or "The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles" is a manuscript which was used by 2nd century bishops and priests for the instruction of catechumens. Many early Christian writers have referenced it making this document relatively easy to date.
"Let no one eat and drink of your Eucharist but those baptized in the name of the Lord; to this, too the saying of the Lord is applicable: 'Do not give to dogs what is sacred'".
-Ch. 9:5
"On the Lord's own day, assemble in common to break bread and offer thanks; but first confess your sins, so that your sacrifice may be pure. However, no one quarreling with his brother may join your meeting until they are reconciled; your sacrifice must not be defiled. For here we have the saying of the Lord: 'In every place and time offer me a pure sacrifice; for I am a mighty King, says the Lord; and my name spreads terror among the nations.'"
-Ch 14
ST. CLEMENT OF ROME
St. Clement was the third successor of Peter as Bishop of Rome; otherwise known as the third Pope.
"Since then these things are manifest to us, and we have looked into the depths of the divine knowledge, we ought to do in order all things which the Master commanded us to perform at appointed times. He commanded us to celebrate sacrifices and services, and that it should not be thoughtlessly or disorderly, but at fixed times and hours. He has Himself fixed by His supreme will the places and persons whom He desires for these celebrations, in order that all things may be done piously according to His good pleasure, and be acceptable to His will. So then those who offer their oblations at the appointed seasons are acceptable and blessed, but they follow the laws of the Master and do not sin. For to the high priest his proper ministrations are allotted, and to the priests the proper place has been appointed, and on Levites their proper services have been imposed. The layman is bound by the ordinances for the laity."
Source: St. Clement, bishop of Rome, 80 A.D., to the Corinthians
"Our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who blamelessly and holily have offered its Sacrifices."
Source: Letter to the Corinthians, [44,4]
ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH
St. Ignatius became the third bishop of Antioch, succeeding St. Evodius, who was the immediate successor of St. Peter. He heard St. John preach when he was a boy and knew St. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna. Seven of his letters written to various Christian communities have been preserved. Eventually, he received the martyr's crown as he was thrown to wild beasts in the arena.
"Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead."
"Letter to the Smyrnaeans", paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.
"Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ."
-"Letter to the Ephesians", paragraph 20, c. 80-110 A.D.
"I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed."
-"Letter to the Romans", paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D.
"Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons."
-Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.
ST. JUSTIN MARTYR
St. Justin Martyr was born a pagan but converted to Christianity after studying philosophy. He was a prolific writer and many Church scholars consider him the greatest apologist or defender of the faith from the 2nd century. He was beheaded with six of his companions some time between 163 and 167 A.D.
"This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior 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, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus."
"First Apology", Ch. 66, inter A.D. 148-155.
"God has therefore announced in advance that all the sacrifices offered in His name, which Jesus Christ offered, that is, in the Eucharist of the Bread and of the Chalice, which are offered by us Christians in every part of the world, are pleasing to Him."
"Dialogue with Trypho", Ch. 117, circa 130-160 A.D.
Moreover, as I said before, concerning the sacrifices which you at that time offered, God speaks through Malachias, one of the twelve, as follows: 'I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices from your hands; for from the rising of the sun until its setting, my name has been glorified among the gentiles; and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a clean offering: for great is my name among the gentiles, says the Lord; but you profane it.' It is of the sacrifices offered to Him in every place by us, the gentiles, that is, of the Bread of the Eucharist and likewise of the cup of the Eucharist, that He speaks at that time; and He says that we glorify His name, while you profane it."
-"Dialogue with Trypho", [41: 8-10]
ST. IRENAEUS OF LYONS
St. Irenaeus succeeded St. Pothinus to become the second bishop of Lyons in 177 A.D. Earlier in his life he studied under St. Polycarp. Considered, one of the greatest theologians of the 2nd century, St. Irenaeus is best known for refuting the Gnostic heresies.
[Christ] has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own Blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own Body, from which he gives increase to our bodies."
Source: St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, 180 A.D.:
"So then, if the mixed cup and the manufactured bread receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, that is to say, the Blood and Body of Christ, which fortify and build up the substance of our flesh, how can these people claim that the flesh is incapable of receiving God's gift of eternal life, when it is nourished by Christ's Blood and Body and is His member? As the blessed apostle says in his letter to the Ephesians, 'For we are members of His Body, of His flesh and of His bones' (Eph. 5:30). He is not talking about some kind of 'spiritual' and 'invisible' man, 'for a spirit does not have flesh an bones' (Lk. 24:39). No, he is talking of the organism possessed by a real human being, composed of flesh and nerves and bones. It is this which is nourished by the cup which is His Blood, and is fortified by the bread which is His Body. The stem of the vine takes root in the earth and eventually bears fruit, and 'the grain of wheat falls into the earth' (Jn. 12:24), dissolves, rises again, multiplied by the all-containing Spirit of God, and finally after skilled processing, is put to human use. These two then receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, which is the Body and Blood of Christ."
-"Five Books on the Unmasking and Refutation of the Falsely Named Gnosis". Book 5:2, 2-3, circa 180 A.D.
"For just as the bread which comes from the earth, having received the invocation of God, is no longer ordinary bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly, so our bodies, having received the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, because they have the hope of the resurrection."
-"Five Books on the Unmasking and Refutation of the Falsely named Gnosis". Book 4:18 4-5, circa 180 A.D.
ST. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA
St. Clement of Alexandria studied under Pantaenus. He later succeeded him as the director of the school of catechumens in Alexandria, Egypt around the year 200 A.D., "The Blood of the Lord, indeed, is twofold. There is His corporeal Blood, by which we are redeemed from corruption; and His spiritual Blood, that with which we are anointed. That is to say, to drink the Blood of Jesus is to share in His immortality. The strength of the Word is the Spirit just as the blood is the strength of the body. Similarly, as wine is blended with water, so is the Spirit with man. The one, the Watered Wine, nourishes in faith, while the other, the Spirit, leads us on to immortality. The union of both, however, - of the drink and of the Word, - is called the Eucharist, a praiseworthy and excellent gift. Those who partake of it in faith are sanctified in body and in soul. By the will of the Father, the divine mixture, man, is mystically united to the Spirit and to the Word.",
-"The Instructor of the Children". [2,2,19,4] ante 202 A.D.,
"The Word is everything to a child: both Father and Mother, both Instructor and Nurse. 'Eat My Flesh,' He says, 'and drink My Blood.' The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients. He delivers over His Flesh, and pours out His Blood; and nothing is lacking for the growth of His children. O incredible mystery!",
-"The Instructor of the Children" [1,6,41,3] ante 202 A.D.. ,
ST. CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE
St. Cyprian of Carthage converted from paganism to Christianity around the year 246 A.D. Soon afterwards, he aspired to the priesthood and eventually was ordained Bishop of Carthage. He was beheaded for his Faith in the year 258 A.D., thus he was the first African bishop to have been martyred.,
"So too the the sacred meaning of the Pasch lies essentially in the fact, laid down in Exodus, that the lamb - slain as a type of Christ - should be eaten in one single home. God says the words: 'In one house shall it be eaten, ye shall not cast its flesh outside.' The flesh of Christ and the Lord's sacred body cannot be cast outside, nor have believers any other home but the one Church.",
-"The Unity of the Catholic Church". Ch.8, circa 249-258 A.D.,
Description of an event in which an infant was taken to a pagan sacrifice and then the mother recovered it and brought it to Mass.
"Listen to what happened in my presence, before my very eyes. There was a baby girl, whose parents had fled and had, in their fear, rather improvidently lift it in the charge of its nurse. The nurse took the helpless child to the magistrates. There, before the idol where the crowds were flocking, as it was too young to eat the flesh, they gave it some bread dipped in what was left of the wine offered by those who had already doomed themselves. Later, the mother recovered her child. But the girl could not reveal or tell the wicked thing that had been done, any more than she had been able to understand or ward it off before. Thus, when the mother brought her in with her while we were offering the Sacrifice, it was through ignorance that this mischance occurred. But the infant, in the midst of the faithful, resenting the prayer and the offering we were making, began to cry convulsively, struggling and tossing in a veritable brain-storm, and for all its tender age and simplicity of soul, was confessing, as if under torture, in every way it could, its consciousness of the misdeed. Moreover, when the sacred rites were completed and the deacon began ministering to those present, when its turn came to receive, it turned its little head away as if sensing the divine presence, it closed its mouth, held its lips tight, and refused to drink from the chalice. The deacon persisted and, in spite of its opposition, poured in some of the consecrated chalice. There followed choking and vomiting. The Eucharist could not remain in a body or mouth that was defiled; the drink which had been sanctified by Our Lord's blood returned from the polluted stomach. So great is the power of the Lord, and so great His majesty!",
-"The Lapsed" Ch. 25, circa 249-258 A.D.,
"The priest who imitates that which Christ did, truly takes the place of Christ, and offers there in the Church a true and perfect sacrifice to God the Father.",
Source: St. Cyprian wrote to the Ephesians circa 258 A.D:,
"There was a woman too who with impure hands tried to open the locket in which she was keeping Our Lord's holy body, but fire flared up from it and she was too terrified to touch it. And a man who, in spite of his sin, also presumed secretly to join the rest in receiving sacrifice offered by the bishop, was unable to eat or even handle Our Lord's sacred body; when he opened his hands, he found he was holding nothing but ashes. By this one example it was made manifest that Our Lord removes Himself from one who denies Him, and that what is received brings no blessing to the unworthy, since the Holy One has fled and the saving grace is turned to ashes.",
-"The Lapsed" Ch. 26, circa 249-258 A.D.,
As the prayer proceeds, we ask and say: 'Give us this day our daily bread.' This can be understood both spiritually and simply, because either understanding is of profit in divine usefulness for salvation. For Christ is the bread of life and the bread here is of all, but is ours. And as we say 'Our Father,' because He is the Father of those who understand and believe, so too we say 'our Bread,' because Christ is the bread of those of us who attain to His body. Moreover, we ask that this bread be given daily, lest we, who are in Christ and receive the Eucharist daily as food of salvation, with the intervention of some more grievous sin, while we are shut off and as non-communicants are kept from the heavenly bread, be separated from the body of Christ as He Himself declares, saying: 'I am the bread of life which came down from heaven. If any man eat of my bread he shall live forever. Moreover, the bread that I shall give is my flesh for the life of the world.' Since then He says that, if anyone eats of His bread, he lives forever, as it is manifest that they live who attain to His body and receive the Eucharist by right of communion, so on the other hand we must fear and pray lest anyone, while he is cut off and separated from the body of Christ, remain apart from salvation, as He Himself threatens, saying: 'Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you.' And so we petition that our bread, that is Christ, be given us daily, so that we, who abide and live in Christ, may not withdraw from His sanctification and body.",
Source: St. Cyprian of Carthage, the Lord's Prayer, 252 A.D., chapter 18:,
APHRAATES THE PERSIAN SAGE
Not much biographical information has been left about Aphraates. It is known that he was one of the Fathers of the Syrian Church. It is speculated that he was made bishop late in his life.,
He is thought to have been born ca. 280 A.D. and to have died ca. 345 A.D.,
"But the Lord was not yet arrested. After having spoken thus, the Lord rose up from the place where He had made the Passover and had given His Body as food and His Blood as drink, and He went with His disciples to the place where He was to be arrested. But he ate of His own Body and drank of His own Blood, while He was pondering on the dead. With His own hands the Lord presented His own Body to be eaten, and before he was crucified He gave His blood as drink; and He was taken at night on the fourteenth, and was judged until the sixth hour; and at the sixth hour they condemned Him and raised Him on the cross.",
- "Treatises" [12,6] inter 336-345 A.D.,
SERAPION
"'Holy, holy, holy Lord Sabaoth, heaven and earth is full of Your glory.' Heaven is full, and full is the earth with your magnificent glory, Lord of Virtues. Full also is this Sacrifice, with your strength and your communion; for to You we offer this living Sacrifice, this unbloody oblation.,
To you we offer this bread, the likeness of the Body of the Only-begotten. This bread is the likeness of His holy Body because the Lord Jesus Christ, on the night on which He was betrayed, took bread and broke and gave to His disciples, saying, 'Take and eat, this is My Body, which is being broken for you, unto the remission of sins.' On this account too do we offer the Bread, to bring ourselves into the likeness of His death; and we pray: Reconcile us all, O God of truth, and be gracious to us. And just as this Bread was scattered over the mountains and when collected was made one, so too gather Your holy Church from every nation and every country and every city and village and house and make it one living Catholic Church.,
We offer also the cup, the likeness of His Blood, because the Lord Jesus Christ took the cup after He had eaten, and He said to His disciples, 'Take, drink, this is the new covenant, which is My Blood which is being poured out for you unto the remission of sins.' For this reason too we offer the chalice, to benefit ourselves by the likeness of His Blood. O God of truth, may Your Holy Logos come upon this Bread, that the Bread may become the Body of the Logos, and on this Cup, that the Cup may become the Blood of the Truth. And make all who communicate receive the remedy of life, to cure every illness and to strengthen every progress and virtue; not unto condemnation, O God of truth, nor unto disgrace and reproach!,
For we invoke You, the Increate, through Your Only-begotten in the Holy Spirit. Be merciful to this people, sent for the destruction of evil and for the security of Your Church. We beseech You also on behalf of all the departed, of whom also this is the commemoration: - after the mentioning of their names: - Sanctify these souls, for You know them all; sanctify all who have fallen asleep in the Lord and count them among the ranks of Your saints and give them a place and abode in your kingdom. Accept also the thanksgiving of Your people and bless those who offer the oblations and the Thanksgivings, and bestow health and integrity and festivity and every progress of soul and body on the whole of this Your people through your Only-begotten Jesus Christ in the Holy Spirit, as it was and is and will be in generations of generations and unto the whole expanse of the ages of ages. Amen.",
-"The Sacramentary of Serapion, Prayer of the Eucharistic Sacrifice" [13],
ST. EPHRAIM
St. Ephraim was one of the great authors of the Syrian Church. Because of his beautiful writings, he is sometimes referred to as the 'lyre of the Holy Spirit'. He studied under James, Bishop of Nisbis. In 338 A.D. he aspired to the diaconate and remained a deacon for the remainder of his life.,
"Our Lord Jesus took in His hands what in the beginning was only bread; and He blessed it, and signed it, and made it holy in the name of the Father and in the name of the Spirit; and He broke it and in His gracious kindness He distributed it to all His disciples one by one. He called the bread His living Body, and did Himself fill it with Himself and the Spirit.,
And extending His hand, He gave them the Bread which His right hand had made holy: 'Take, all of you eat of this; which My word has made holy. Do not now regard as bread that which I have given you; but take, eat this Bread, and do not scatter the crumbs; for what I have called My Body, that it is indeed. One particle from its crumbs is able to sanctify thousands and thousands, and is sufficient to afford life to those who eat of it. Take, eat, entertaining no doubt of faith, because this is My Body, and whoever eats it in belief eats in it Fire and Spirit. But if any doubter eat of it, for him it will be only bread. And whoever eats in belief the Bread made holy in My name, if he be pure, he will be preserved in his purity; and if he be a sinner, he will be forgiven.' But if anyone despise it or reject it or treat it with ignominy, it may be taken as certainty that he treats with ignominy the Son, who called it and actually made it to be His Body.",
-"Homilies" 4,4 ca.. 350 A.D.,
"After the disciples had eaten the new and holy Bread, and when they understood by faith that they had eaten of Christ's body, Christ went on to explain and to give them the whole Sacrament. He took and mixed a cup of wine. The He blessed it, and signed it, and made it holy, declaring that it was His own Blood, which was about to be poured out….Christ commanded them to drink, and He explained to them that the cup which they were drinking was His own Blood: 'This is truly My Blood, which is shed for all of you. Take, all of you, drink of this, because it is a new covenant in My Blood, As you have seen Me do, do you also in My memory. Whenever you are gathered together in My name in Churches everywhere, do what I have done, in memory of Me. Eat My Body, and drink My Blood, a covenant new and old.",
-"Homilies" 4,6 ca. 350 A.D.,
"'And your floors shall be filled with wheat, and the presses shall overflow equally with wine and oil.' … This has been fulfilled mystically by Christ, who gave to the people whom He had redeemed, that is, to His Church, wheat and wine and oil in a mystic manner. For the wheat is the mystery of His sacred Body; and the wine His saving Blood; and again, the oil is the sweet unguent with which those who are baptized are signed, being clothed in the armaments of the Holy Spirit.",
-"On Joel 2:24", Commentaries on Sacred Scripture, Vol. 2 p. 252 of the Assemani edition.
ST. ATHANASIUS
St. Athanasius was born in Alexandria ca. 295 A.D. He was ordained a deacon in 319 A.D. He accompanied his bishop, Alexander, to the Council of Nicaea, where he served as his secretary. Eventually he succeeded Alexander as Bishop of Alexandria. He is most known for defending Nicene doctrine against Arian disputes.,
"'The great Athanasius in his sermon to the newly baptized says this:' You shall see the Levites bringing loaves and a cup of wine, and placing them on the table. So long as the prayers of supplication and entreaties have not been made, there is only bread and wine. But after the great and wonderful prayers have been completed, then the bread is become the Body, and the wine the Blood, of our Lord Jesus Christ. 'And again:' Let us approach the celebration of the mysteries. This bread and this wine, so long as the prayers and supplications have not taken place, remain simply what they are. But after the great prayers and holy supplications have been sent forth, the Word comes down into the bread and wine - and thus His Body is confected.",
-"Sermon to the Newly Baptized" ante 373 A.D.,
ST. CYRIL OF JERUSALEM
St. Cyril served as Bishop of Jerusalem in the years 348-378 A.D.,
"`I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread, etc. [1 Cor. 11:23]'. This teaching of the Blessed Paul is alone sufficient to give you a full assurance concerning those Divine Mysteries, which when ye are vouchsafed, ye are of (the same body) [Eph 3:6] and blood with Christ. For he has just distinctly said, (That our Lord Jesus Christ the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread, and when He had given thanks He brake it, and said, Take, eat, this is My Body: and having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, Take, drink, this is My Blood.) [1 Cor. 2:23-25] Since then He Himself has declared and said of the Bread, (This is My Body), who shall dare to doubt any longer? And since He has affirmed and said, (This is My Blood), who shall ever hesitate, saying, that it is not His blood?
-"Catechetical Lectures [22 (Mystagogic 4), 1]
"Therefore with fullest 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, mightest 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 diffused through our members; thus it is that, according to the blessed Peter, (we become partaker of the divine nature.) [2 Peter 1:4]
-"Catechetical Lectures [22 (Mystagogic 4), 3]
"Contemplate therefore the Bread and Wine not as bare elements, for they are, according to the Lord's declaration, the Body and Blood of Christ; for though sense suggests this to thee, let faith stablish thee. Judge not the matter from taste, but from faith be fully assured without misgiving, that thou hast been vouchsafed the Body and Blood of Christ.
-"Catechetical Lectures [22 (Mystagogic 4), 6]"
"9. These things having learnt, and being fully persuaded that what seems bread is not bread, though bread by taste, but the Body of Christ; and that what seems wine is not wine, though the taste will have it so, but the Blood of Christ; and that of this David sung of old, saying, (And bread which strengtheneth man's heart, and oil to make his face to shine) [Ps. 104:15], `strengthen thine heart', partaking thereof as spiritual, and `make the face of thy soul to shine'. And so having it unveiled by a pure conscience, mayest thou behold as in a glass the glory of the Lord, and proceed from glory to glory [2 Cor. 3:18], in Christ Jesus our Lord:--To whom be honor, and might, and glory, for ever and ever. Amen."
Source: St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogic Catechesis 4,1, c. 350 A.D.:
"Then upon the completion of the spiritual Sacrifice, the bloodless worship, over the propitiatory victim we call upon God for the common peace of the Churches, for the welfare of the world, for kings, for soldiers and allies, for the sick, for the afflicted; and in summary, we all pray and offer this Sacrifice for all who are in need."
"Mystagogic Catechesis [23: 5-7]
"Then we make mention also of those who have already fallen asleep: first, the patriarchs, prophets, Apostles, and martyrs, that through their prayers and supplications God would receive our petition; next, we make mention also of the holy fathers and bishops who have already fallen asleep, and, to put it simply, of all among us who have already fallen asleep; for we believe that it will be of very great benefit of the souls of those for whom the petition is carried up, while this holy and most solemn Sacrifice is laid out."
-Mystagogic Catechesis [23 (Mystagogic 5), 10]
"After this you hear the singing which invites you with a divine melody to the Communion of the Holy Mysteries, and which says, 'Taste and see that the Lord is good.' Do not trust to the judgement of the bodily palate - no, but to unwavering faith. For they who are urged to taste do not taste of bread and wine, but to the antitype, of the Body and Blood of Christ."
-"Mystagogic Catecheses 5 23, 20 ca. 350 A.D
"Keep these traditions inviolate, and preserve yourselves from offenses. Do not cut yourselves off from Communion, do not deprive yourselves, through the pollution of sins, of these Holy and Spiritual Mysteries."
-"Mystagogic Catechesis [23 (Mystagogic 5), 23]"
ST. HILARY OF POITERS
St. Hilary firmly defended the Nicene Creed against Arian false doctrines. He was ordained Bishop of Poiters in 350 A.D. His efforts led to the collapse of Arianism in the West. He was proclaimed a Doctor of the Church by Pius IX in 1851.
"When we speak of the reality of Christ's nature being in us, we would be speaking foolishly and impiously - had we not learned it from Him. For He Himself says: 'My Flesh is truly Food, and My Blood is truly Drink. He that eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood will remain in Me and I in him.' As to the reality of His Flesh and Blood, there is no room left for doubt, because now, both by the declaration of the Lord Himself and by our own faith, it is truly the Flesh and it is truly Blood. And These Elements bring it about, when taken and consumed, that we are in Christ and Christ is in us. Is this not true? Let those who deny that Jesus Christ is true God be free to find these things untrue. But He Himself is in us through the flesh and we are in Him, while that which we are with Him is in God."
-"The Trinity" [8,14] inter 356-359 A.D.
ST. BASIL THE GREAT
St. Basil is recognized as the founder of Eastern monasticism. He was ordained Bishop of Caesarea in 370 A.D. He defended the Catholic Church against two waves of Arian attacks. The first movement denied the divinity of Christ. The second denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit. He is considered one of the greatest saints of the Oriental Church.
"What is the mark of a Christian? That he be purified of all defilement of the flesh and of the spirit in the Blood of Christ, perfecting sanctification in the fear of God and the love of Christ, and that he have no blemish nor spot nor any such thing; that he be holy and blameless and so eat the Body of Christ and drink His Blood; for 'he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgement to himself.' What is the mark of those who eat the Bread and drink the Cup of Christ? That they keep in perpetual remembrance Him who died for us and rose again."
-"The Morals" Ch. 22
"He, therefore, who approaches the Body and Blood of Christ in commemoration of Him who died for us and rose again must be free not only from defilement of flesh and spirit, in order that he may not eat drink unto judgement, but he must actively manifest the remembrance of Him who died for us and rose again, by being dead to sin, to the world, and to himself, and alive unto God in Christ Jesus, our Lord."
-"Concerning Baptism" Book I, Ch. 3.
"To communicate each day and to partake of the holy Body and Blood of Christ is good and beneficial; for He says quite plainly: 'He that eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood has eternal life.' Who can doubt that to share continually in life is the same thing as having life abundantly? We ourselves communicate four times each week, on Sunday, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday; and on other days if there is a commemoration of any saint."
-"Letter to a Patrician Lady Caesaria" [93] ca. 372 A.D.
ST. EPIPHANIUS OF SALAMIS
"We see that the Saviour took [something] in His hands, as it is in the Gospel, when He was reclining at the supper; and He took this, and giving thanks, He said: 'This is really Me.' And He gave to His disciples and said: 'This is really Me.' And we see that It is not equal nor similar, not to the incarnate image, not to the invisible divinity, not to the outline of His limbs. For It is round of shape, and devoid of feeling. As to Its power, He means to say even of Its grace, 'This is really Me.'; and none disbelieves His word. For anyone who does not believe the truth in what He says is deprived of grace and of a Savior."
-"The Man Well-Anchored" [57] 374 A.D.
ST. GREGORY OF NAZIANZ
St. Gregory was consecrated Bishop of Sasima in the year 371 A.D and was a friend of St. Basil for most of his life. BR> "Cease not to pray and plead for me when you draw down the Word by your word, when in an unbloody cutting you cut the Body and Blood of the Lord, using your voice for a sword."
-"Letter to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium" [171] ca. 383 A.D.
ST. GREGORY OF NYSSA
"Rightly then, do we believe that the bread consecrated by the word of God has been made over into the Body of the God the Word. For that Body was, as to its potency bread; but it has been consecrated by the lodging there of the Word, who pitched His tent in the flesh."
-"The Great Catechism [37: 9-13]"
"He offered Himself for us, Victim and Sacrifice, and Priest as well, and 'Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.' When did He do this? When He made His own Body food and His own Blood drink for His disciples; for this much is clear enough to anyone, that a sheep cannot be eaten by a man unless its being eaten be preceded by its being slaughtered. This giving of His own Body to His disciples for eating clearly indicates that the sacrifice of the Lamb has now been completed."
-"Orations and Sermons" [Jaeger: Vol 9, p. 287] ca. 383 A.D.
"The bread is at first common bread; but when the mystery sanctifies it, it is called and actually becomes the Body of Christ."
-"Orations and Sermons" [Jaeger Vol 9, pp. 225-226] ca. 383 A.D.
ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM
From 386-397 A.D. St. John Chrysostom served as a priest in the main church of Antioch. He soon became renown for his preaching and writing skills. In 397 A.D. he succeeded St. Gregory of Nazianz as Bishop of Constantinople.
"When the word says, 'This is My Body,' be convinced of it and believe it, and look at it with the eyes of the mind. For Christ did not give us something tangible, but even in His tangible things all is intellectual. So too with Baptism: the gift is bestowed through what is a tangible thing, water; but what is accomplished is intellectually perceived: the birth and the renewal. If you were incorporeal He would have given you those incorporeal gifts naked; but since the soul is intertwined with the body, He hands over to you in tangible things that which is perceived intellectually. How many now say, 'I wish I could see His shape, His appearance, His garments, His sandals.' Only look! You see Him! You touch Him! You eat Him!"
-"Homilies on the Gospel of Matthew" [82,4] 370 A.D.
"I wish to add something that is plainly awe-inspiring, but do not be astonished or upset. This Sacrifice, no matter who offers it, be it Peter or Paul, is always the same as that which Christ gave His disciples and which priests now offer: The offering of today is in no way inferior to that which Christ offered, because it is not men who sanctify the offering of today; it is the same Christ who sanctified His own. For just as the words which God spoke are the very same as those which the priest now speaks, so too the oblation is the very same."
Source: St. John Chrysostom, "Homilies on the Second Epistle to Timothy," 2,4, c. 397 A.D.
"It is not the power of man which makes what is put before us the Body and Blood of Christ, but the power of Christ Himself who was crucified for us. The priest standing there in the place of Christ says these words but their power and grace are from God. 'This is My Body,' he says, and these words transform what lies before him."
Source: St. John Chrysostom, "Homilies on the Treachery of Judas" 1,6; d. 407 A.D.:
"'The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not communion of the Blood of Christ?' Very trustworthily and awesomely does he say it. For what he is saying is this: 'What is in the cup is that which flowed from His side, and we partake of it.' He called it a cup of blessing because when we hold it in our hands that is how we praise Him in song, wondering and astonished at His indescribable Gift, blessing Him because of His having poured out this very Gift so that we might not remain in error, and not only for His having poured out It out, but also for His sharing It with all of us."
-"Homilies on the First Letter to the Corinthians" [24,1] ca. 392 A.D.
ST. AMBROSE OF MILAN
"You perhaps say: 'My bread is usual.' But the bread is bread before the words of the sacraments; when consecration has been added, from bread it becomes the flesh of Christ. So let us confirm this, how it is possible that what is bread is the body of Christ. By what words, then, is the consecration and by whose expressions? By those of the Lord Jesus. For all the rest that are said in the preceding are said by the priest: praise to God, prayer is offered, there is a petition for the people, for kings, for the rest. When it comes to performing a venerable sacrament, then the priest uses not his own expressions, but he uses the expressions of Christ. Thus the expression of Christ performs this sacrament."
-"The Sacraments" Book 4, Ch.4:14.
"Let us be assured that this is not what nature formed, but what the blessing consecrated, and that greater efficacy resides in the blessing than in nature, for by the blessing nature is changed… . Surely the word of Christ, which could make out of nothing that which did not exist, can change things already in existence into what they were not. For it is no less extraordinary to give things new natures than to change their natures… . Christ is in that Sacrament, because it is the Body of Christ; yet, it is not on that account corporeal food, but spiritual. Whence also His Apostle says of the type: `For our fathers ate spiritual food and drink spiritual drink.' [1 Cor. 10:2-4] For the body of God is a spiritual body."
-"On the Mysteries" 9, 50-52, 58; 391 A.D.:
"His poverty enriches, the fringe of His garment heals, His hunger satisfies, His death gives life, His burial gives resurrection. Therefore, He is a rich treasure, for His bread is rich. And 'rich' is apt for one who has eaten this bread will be unable to feel hunger. He gave it to the Apostles to distribute to a believing people, and today He gives it to us, for He, as a priest, daily consecrates it with His own words. Therefore, this bread has become the food of the saints."
-"The Patriarchs" Ch. 9:38
"Thus, every soul which receives the bread which comes down from heaven is a house of bread, the bread of Christ, being nourished and having its heart strengthened by the support of the heavenly bread which dwells within it."
-"Letter to Horontianus" circa 387 A.D.
EGERIA
"Following the dismissal from the Martyrium, everyone proceeds behind the Cross, where, after a hymn is sung and a prayer is said, the bishop offers the sacrifice and everyone receives Communion. Except on this one day, throughout the year the sacrifice is never offered behind the Cross save on this day alone."
-"Diary of a Pilgrimage" Ch. 35.
Describes a Mass held in front of Mt. Sinai.
"All of the proper passage from the Book of Moses was read, the sacrifice was offered in the prescribed manner, and we received Communion."
-"Diary of a Pilgrimage" Ch. 3.
AURELIUS PRUDENTIUS CLEMENS
"Such is the hidden retreat where Hippolytus' body is buried. Next to an altar nearby, built for the worship of God. Table from which the sacrament all holy is given, close to the martyr it stands, set as a faithful guard."
-"Hymns for Every Day" Hymn 170.
ST. JEROME
"After the type had been fulfilled by the Passover celebration and He had eaten the flesh of the lamb with His Apostles, He takes bread which strengthens the heart of man, and goes on to the true Sacrament of the Passover, so that just as Melchisedech, the priest of the Most High God, in prefiguring Him, made bread and wine an offering, He too makes Himself manifest in the reality of His own Body and Blood."
-"Commentaries on the Gospel of Matthew" [4,26,26] 398 A.D.
APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS
"A bishop gives the blessing, he does not receive it. He imposes hands, he ordains, he offers the Sacrifice"
"Apostolic Constitutions [8, 28, 2:9]"
ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA
"Christ said indicating (the bread and wine): 'This is My Body,' and "This is My Blood," in order that you might not judge what you see to be a mere figure. The offerings, by the hidden power of God Almighty, are changed into Christ's Body and Blood, and by receiving these we come to share in the life-giving and sanctifying efficacy of Christ."
Source: St. Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew 26,27, 428 A.D.:
"We have been instructed in these matters and filled with an unshakable faith, that that which seems to be bread, is not bread, though it tastes like it, but the Body of Christ, and that which seems to be wine, is not wine, though it too tastes as such, but the Blood of Christ … draw inner strength by receiving this bread as spiritual food and your soul will rejoice."
Source: St. Cyril of Alexandria, "Catecheses," 22, 9; "Myst." 4; d. 444 A.D.:
ST. AUGUSTINE
"You ought to know what you have received, what you are going to receive, and what you ought to receive daily. That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Body of Christ. The chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Blood of Christ."
-"Sermons", [227, 21]
"He who made you men, for your sakes was Himself made man; to ensure your adoption as many sons into an everlasting inheritance, the blood of the Only-Begotten has been shed for you. If in your own reckoning you have held yourselves cheap because of your earthly frailty, now assess yourselves by the price paid for you; meditate, as you should, upon what you eat, what you drink, to what you answer 'Amen'".
-"Second Discourse on Psalm 32". Ch. 4. circa
"For the whole Church observes this practice which was handed down by the Fathers: that it prayers for those who have died in the communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, when they are commemorated in their own place in the sacrifice itself; and the sacrifice is offered also in memory of them on their behalf.
Source: St. Augustine, Sermons 172,2, circa 400 A.D.
"The fact that our fathers of old offered sacrifices with beasts for victims, which the present-day people of God read about but do not do, is to be understood in no way but this: that those things signified the things that we do in order to draw near to God and to recommend to our neighbor the same purpose. A visible sacrifice, therefore, is the sacrament, that is to say, the sacred sign, of an invisible sacrifice… . Christ is both the Priest, offering Himself, and Himself the Victim. He willed that the sacramental sign of this should be the daily sacrifice of the Church, who, since the Church is His body and He the Head, learns to offer herself through Him.
Source: St. Augustine, The City of God, 10, 5; 10,20, c. 426:
MARCARIUS THE MAGNESIAN
"[Christ] took the bread and the cup, each in a similar fashion, and said: 'This is My Body and this is My Blood.' Not a figure of His body nor a figure of His blood, as some persons of petrified mind are wont to rhapsodize, but in truth the Body and the Blood of Christ, seeing that His body is from the earth, and the bread and wine are likewise from the earth."
-"Apocriticus" [3,23] ca. 400 A.D.
ST. LEO I
"When the Lord says: 'Unless you shall have eaten the flesh of the Son of Man and shall have drunk His blood, you shall not have life in you,' you ought to so communicate at the Sacred Table that you have no doubt whatever of the truth of the Body and the Blood of Christ. For that which is taken in the mouth is what is believed in faith; and in do those respond, 'Amen,' who argue against that which is received."
-"Sermons" [91,3] ante 461 A.D.
ST. CAESAR OF ARLES
"As often as some infirmity overtakes a man, let him who is ill receive the Body and Blood of Christ."
-"Sermons [13 (265), 3]
ST. FULGENE OF RUSPE
"Hold most firmly and never doubt in the least that the Only-begotten God the Word Himself become flesh offered Himself in an odor of sweetness as a Sacrifice and Victim to God on our behalf; to whom, with the Father, and the Holy Spirit, in the time of the Old Testament animals were sacrificed by the patriarchs and prophets and priests; and to whom now, I mean in the time of the New Testament, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, with whom He has one Godhead, the Holy Catholic Church does not cease in faith and love to offer throughout all the lands of the world a sacrifice of Bread and Wine … In those former sacrifices what would be given us in the future was signified figuratively; but in this sacrifice which has now been given us, it is shown plainly. In those former sacrifices it was fore-announced that the Son of God would be killed for the impious; but in the present it is announced that He has been killed for the impious."
-"The Rule of Faith [62]"
CONCLUSION
"I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: preach the word, be urgent in season and out of season, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching. For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths."
(2 Tim 4:1-4)
Second, bdeaner derives his opinion of Genesis from nineteenth century German Biblical criticism and comparative mythology. And you have no objections to this as a source of Biblical interpretation?
And third, my point is the utter hypocrisy of insisting that John 6 be interpreted literally while insisting just as vehemently that Genesis 1-11 need not be interpreted literally. While I hold no brief for Raymond Brown, I give him this much: unlike most Catholic critics of Genesis, he was consistent.
And as to "one post," anytime there's a thread dealing with the Vatican or the Catholic Church and its position (or non-position) on Genesis the thread fills up with Catholic evolutionists and higher critics.
Not so long ago an atheist science professor stirred folks up by impaling a consecrated host with a nail. The same people who laugh at people who accept Genesis at face value suddenly became simple illiterate peasants in their eucharistic beliefs and nearly had a conniption. I say such an occurrence was justice for Catholic indifference (or hostility) to Genesis (and the rest of the Hebrew Bible for that matter). The J*sus seminar is another example of the chickens coming home to roost.
How you people can base a true "new testament" on a "mythical" old one is beyond me.
You wrote:
“First of all, the Kolbe Center is a good outfit. I wish they’d update their web page.”
Yeah, me too. More than six months is too long for an update.
“Second, bdeaner derives his opinion of Genesis from nineteenth century German Biblical criticism and comparative mythology.”
St. Augustine wasn’t German and didn’t live in the 19th century.
“And you have no objections to this as a source of Biblical interpretation?”
St. Augustine? Nope.
“And third, my point is the utter hypocrisy of insisting that John 6 be interpreted literally while insisting just as vehemently that Genesis 1-11 need not be interpreted literally.”
I think you’re making a serious mistake there. Someone could claim (not that I agree with it), that Genesis 1 is a metaphor or allegory. No one can seriously claim that for John 6. Why? The two most important reasons - outside of Christ’s own insistence that He was not speaking metaphorically by repeatedly saying “Amen, amen”, and not correcting the understanding of those who abandoned Him - is 1) that we know what the metaphor for eat my flesh is. Look at Ps. 27.2 and you’ll know what I’m talking about, and 2) the Church ALWAYS said John 6 is what it is.
“While I hold no brief for Raymond Brown, I give him this much: unlike most Catholic critics of Genesis, he was consistent.”
Raymond Brown was Catholic? I’m not so sure about that. ;)
“And as to “one post,” anytime there’s a thread dealing with the Vatican or the Catholic Church and its position (or non-position) on Genesis the thread fills up with Catholic evolutionists and higher critics.”
I really have not seen that.
“Not so long ago an atheist science professor stirred folks up by impaling a consecrated host with a nail. The same people who laugh at people who accept Genesis at face value suddenly became simple illiterate peasants in their eucharistic beliefs and nearly had a conniption. I say such an occurrence was justice for Catholic indifference (or hostility) to Genesis (and the rest of the Hebrew Bible for that matter).”
So if Baptist Freepers doubt your understanding of the Bible you would be okay with...burning their churches down? How about relieving blatters on their altars? If a Lutheran disagrees with you, it’s okay to drop trou at next Sunday’s services? I know you think these examples are ridiculous, but they pale in comparison to what we think is actually going on when someone commits sacrilege against the Eucharist.
“The J*sus seminar is another example of the chickens coming home to roost.”
A Protestant effort not approved of by the Catholic Church.
“How you people can base a true “new testament” on a “mythical” old one is beyond me.”
How you can conflat issues that no else is is beyond me.
My question then....would be....How was it they (the Disciples) procured a sacrificed lamb from the temple if the sacrifices would not begin until the following afternoon? Notice that the Jews would not enter the Palace of the Roman Governor on the morning of the 14th (Passover/Leviticus 23:5) as they had not yet eaten the Passover (the lamb) which would not yet be prepared until 3:00 P.M. that afternoon. This was the morning following His arrest in the garden.
None of the four Gospels mentions a lamb being eaten at the "last supper." The time had not yet come to slay the Passover when Christ and his disciples ate their last meal together. He WAS THE PASSOVER!
I'm not of "Their" religion....by the way.
How you can conflat issues that no else is is beyond me.
Oh. The Bible says in one place that the earth was created in six days (and gives a very detailed chronology of when) and in another (your bible, that is) it says that the bread and wine turn into flesh and blood. One is literal and one isn't. You think insisting they must both be literal is "conflating issues no one else does?" I wish my old friend wideawake were still here.
Bdeaner and the other Catholics on this thread are not singling out the days of creation but the entire first eleven chapters of the book which includes Cain and Abel, the Flood, and the Tower of Babel. Furthermore he invoked Gilgamesh, an ancient Babylonian myth seized on by German atheists in the late nineteenth century, to justify this. He used quotes from ancient church authorities to defend transubstantiation but he obviously rejects the church fathers as "men of their time" when it comes to Genesis because he invokes Gilgamesh. So if the church fathers were ignorant, naive, pre-scientific men when it comes to Genesis, then one must also admit that they could be equally ignorant, naive, and pre-scientific when it comes to transubstantiation. To not admit this, to hold that the church fathers are authoritative on one matter but not another, is to show they aren't really the reason one believes in transubstantiation in the first place. Could it be a visceral reaction to "those awful people?" Must we believe anything they do not and disbelieve everything they do?
Let us say that it doesn't matter whether or not the world was created in six literal days. Does it matter if one believes that Adam and Eve were two real people? That Cain and Abel actually existed and that the former murdered the latter? That there was a Flood out of which only eight people were saved? That mankind's languages were confounded at Babel? That there were exactly twenty-six generations (all carefully dated) from the Creation of Adam to the birth of Moses? Just which of these is unimportant, Vlad? No, I'm serious. Which is optional?
Maybe it doesn't matter whether or not Israel was ever enslaved in Egypt. Maybe the story of the sea parting is a silly myth invented by primitive people before the enlightenment showed us such things can never be.
Listen to me, Vlad. You have in the past accused me of slandering the Catholic Church and Catholics, yet you have admitted that even to you, who believe in the events related in Genesis, it just isn't that important. You have just confirmed everything I have ever said (or thought) about Catholics and their hypocritical vendetta against the Hebrew Bible.
Every chr*stmas eve the priest chants out the chronology of creation until the birth of J*sus--but no one actually believes it. It's a pantomime! Ditto for the prayers in the mass that invoke the sacrifices of Abel and Melchizedeq. If Genesis doesn't matter--if it is just as likely to be myth or parable as actual history--then all these prayers are reduced to a pantomime recited by a play actor, somewhat on the level of the "Hiram Abiff" legend during a Masonic initiation. What kind of church is this? What kind of church says that these events invoked in its holiest prayer may have happened, but they didn't necessarily actually happen? I've got news for you: the prayers in the `Amidah and Birkat HaMazon that invoke the events of Purim and Chanukkah could not be uttered if the events they thank G-d for didn't actually happen; that would be a sin!
You're right about Raymond Brown. He couldn't possibly have been Catholic. He was too consistent and too honest. Only someone who holds--or who defends the right of others to hold--that the Jewish part of the Bible is didactic mythology while the chr*stian part of it is "real history" is not only a hypocrite but a theological anti-Semite.
Oh, and don’t even get me started on Catholics who go into spasms of ecstasy at the thought of Mary making the sun dance in Portugal in 1917 who smirk at the Bible’s narrative of the sun standing still for Joshua!
I neglected to give you a scripture reference for the Jew’s hesitation to enter the Palace for cleanliness reasons. It is: [John 18:28-29].
You wrote:
“I was not aware that Augustine was that up on the epic of Gilgamesh. Wow. Learn something new every day.”
He was up on Genesis which is what bdeaner cited him for.
“Oh. The Bible says in one place that the earth was created in six days (and gives a very detailed chronology of when) and in another (your bible, that is) it says that the bread and wine turn into flesh and blood. One is literal and one isn’t.”
No. Everything in the Bible has a literal meaning, but that doesn’t mean they are to be taken ONLY literally. Also, Genesis offers no time specific chronology of creation. It offers a sequence of events. If there was a time specific chronology then there would be specific time references and yet we only get “In the beginning...”
“You think insisting they must both be literal is “conflating issues no one else does?” I wish my old friend wideawake were still here.”
No, I think you conflate all sorts of issues. You always do. You assume one thing is another. You are, right now, conflating the idea that every verse has a literal meaning with the idea that every verse’s literal meaning was meant to be taken as plain explanation. St. Paul talks about allegories for a reason.
“Bdeaner and the other Catholics on this thread are not singling out the days of creation but the entire first eleven chapters of the book which includes Cain and Abel, the Flood, and the Tower of Babel.”
Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t. I’m not wasting my time to check because I already know that you simply can’t talk about this issue with any clarity. Again, you’ll conflate one thing with another.
“Furthermore he invoked Gilgamesh, an ancient Babylonian myth seized on by German atheists in the late nineteenth century, to justify this. He used quotes from ancient church authorities to defend transubstantiation but he obviously rejects the church fathers as “men of their time” when it comes to Genesis because he invokes Gilgamesh.”
No. In post #19 bdeaner posted this: “St. Augustine (A.D> 354-430) wrote on this topic in his book, The Literal Meaning of Genesis. This quote comes from a translation by J. H. Taylor in Ancient Christian Writers, Newman Press, 1982, volume 41.”
Do you see it? LITERAL MEANING OF GENESIS.
So there you are conflating two DIFFERENT things again as if they were the same. Transsubstantiation is not the same thing as LITERAL MEANING OF GENESIS.
“Listen to me, Vlad. You have in the past accused me of slandering the Catholic Church and Catholics, yet you have admitted that even to you, who believe in the events related in Genesis, it just isn’t that important.”
No. Again you’re saying one thing is the same as another. I said:
“You want everything to be neat and tidy and plainly black and white and have everyone agree with YOU and YOUR interpretation of scripture. That ain’t gonna happen. I take Genesis 1 and 2 quite literally, but realize God can create in anyway He chooses. bdeaner doesn’t take Genesis 1 and 2 quite literally, but realizes God can create anyway He chooses. So, while you’re losing sleep over this, and worrying that the world is going to hell in a handbasket because of it, I, in my bed, and bdeaner in his, will be sleeping just fine.”
That is WAY DIFFERENT than, “it just isn’t that important.”
Again, you are making it look like one thing is the same as another.
“You have just confirmed everything I have ever said (or thought) about Catholics and their hypocritical vendetta against the Hebrew Bible.”
Oh, here we go. So, you invent something I never said and claim it proves what you always said? ROFLOL! Neat trick. And we’re back, once again, to it always being about your interpretation and your conflating of things.
“Every chr*stmas eve the priest chants out the chronology of creation until the birth of J*sus—but no one actually believes it.”
I believe it and so does my priest.
“It’s a pantomime! Ditto for the prayers in the mass that invoke the sacrifices of Abel and Melchizedeq. If Genesis doesn’t matter—if it is just as likely to be myth or parable as actual history—then all these prayers are reduced to a pantomime recited by a play actor, somewhat on the level of the “Hiram Abiff” legend during a Masonic initiation. What kind of church is this? What kind of church says that these events invoked in its holiest prayer may have happened, but they didn’t necessarily actually happen? I’ve got news for you: the prayers in the `Amidah and Birkat HaMazon that invoke the events of Purim and Chanukkah could not be uttered if the events they thank G-d for didn’t actually happen; that would be a sin!”
Uh, when you’re done with your rant, let me know.
“You’re right about Raymond Brown. He couldn’t possibly have been Catholic. He was too consistent and too honest.”
Actually he was neither, but why let a fact get in the way of your post, right?
“Only someone who holds—or who defends the right of others to hold—that the Jewish part of the Bible is didactic mythology while the chr*stian part of it is “real history” is not only a hypocrite but a theological anti-Semite.”
Oh, please. So, someone who doesn’t believe in the most literal understanding of Genesis 1 and 2 is not an anti-Semite? Like I’ve told you before: you are obsessive on this issue. Obsessive to the point that you’ve lost touch with reason if you’re going to hurl around bogus charges of anti-semitism.
You wrote:
“Oh, and don’t even get me started on Catholics who go into spasms of ecstasy at the thought of Mary making the sun dance in Portugal in 1917 who smirk at the Bible’s narrative of the sun standing still for Joshua!”
Oh, and don’t even get me started about how low class it is to call people anti-semites just because they disagree with you and defeat you in debates.
He invoked Augustine after observing that Genesis "reads like Gilgamesh." Thus it isn't Augustine's authority alone he was invoking but nineteenth century comparative mythology.
No. Everything in the Bible has a literal meaning, but that doesn’t mean they are to be taken ONLY literally.
In just over ten years on this forum I have never said that the Bible is to be taken "only" literally. Now who is conflating? Biblical literalism and sola scriptura are two completely separate things, though some Catholics apparently can't help confusing the two--hence the hostility to any insistence on the literal historical truth of Genesis. Just because every verse in the Torah has four (or even seventy, or even more) interpretations doesn't mean that it didn't also happen literally as written!
Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t. I’m not wasting my time to check because
Because it's not important in Catholicism. After all, we don't want to sound like "those people." Let's bend over backwards for the "gays" but if someone has trouble accepting modern Biblical criticism, well then, he isn't intellectual enough for the Catholic Church. I wonder how Catholic theologians would react if science ever discovered a "literalist gene?"
So there you are conflating two DIFFERENT things again as if they were the same. Transsubstantiation is not the same thing as LITERAL MEANING OF GENESIS.
Both are totally contrary to "natural law" but are asserted by the Catholic bible. Yet only one actually happened--or it's only really important whether one of them actually happened.
No. Again you’re saying one thing is the same as another.
If they're both part of the authentic Bible they are the same thing. If one of them isn't, then its part is not the Word of G-d. I can admit this with my rejection of the nt, but liturgical chr*stians can't let the "old testament" go. They've based their entire religion on it, even if they've since branded it mythology!
And I reiterate again--you (and others) have in the past (not in your last post) accused me of making stuff up. Believe me, you can't make stuff like this up!
I believe it and so does my priest.
And yet here you are, arguing with me, because even though you believe it to be true, it's not that important whether all Catholics believe it! So there are priests who recite prayers citing events they believe happened, and other priests who recite prayers that cite what they believe is mythology, but apparently it doesn't matter. All Catholics must agree on the literal interpretation of John 6, but when it comes to Genesis and the events that allegedly made chr*stianity necessary . . . well, that's up to you!
Also, Genesis offers no time specific chronology of creation. It offers a sequence of events. If there was a time specific chronology then there would be specific time references and yet we only get “In the beginning...”
Here, my friend, you are very, very wrong! The ancient Sages constructed the chronology of Genesis long ago and it may be found as an appendix in almost any printed Rabbinic Bible. They did this from the birth and death dates of the first 26 generations (ten from Adam to Noach, ten from Noach to Abraham, and six from Abraham to Moses)--the equivalent of the numerical value of G-d's Name. And from this we have the current year number 5769 which the Lubavitcher Rebbe claimed is not merely a claim of truth but a Halakhah. For that matter, I could direct you to a traditional Jewish chronology online if you were interested.
And you're arranging for a Creation seminar with the Kolbe Center? Why, if it's not that important? Why don't you tell Hugh Owen that while you interpret Genesis literally you don't think it's really that important? Maybe if it's not that important you should just forget about the whole thing. In fact, if it's not that important, why are you trying to arrange a seminar with the Kolbe Center at all? You seem somewhat conflicted.
Face it--the Catholic/Orthodox antipathy to the historicity of the Hebrew Bible is a form of theological anti-Semitism, exactly on a par with the alleged supersession of the Biblical rituals with chr*stian ones and of the Holy Temple by the church. What other explanation is there?
You wrote:
“He invoked Augustine after observing that Genesis “reads like Gilgamesh.” Thus it isn’t Augustine’s authority alone he was invoking but nineteenth century comparative mythology.”
You said he did so because of transsubstantiation. You were wrong. Period.
“In just over ten years on this forum I have never said that the Bible is to be taken “only” literally. Now who is conflating? Biblical literalism and sola scriptura are two completely separate things, though some Catholics apparently can’t help confusing the two—hence the hostility to any insistence on the literal historical truth of Genesis.”
(sigh) I never once mentioned sola scriptura anywhere in this thread. Not once. Not once anywhere. Now you’re implying I did. I’ve told you not to do this before. Why do you keep doing it?
And here you do it again:
“And you’re arranging for a Creation seminar with the Kolbe Center? Why, if it’s not that important?”
That is the second time you have falsely accused me of not believing it is important. I never said that. Why do you keep saying I said things I never, EVER said? I have told you about this on more than one occasion. I don’t mind you arguing with me, but can’t you actually deal with what I said, rather than invent things I never said?
“Why don’t you tell Hugh Owen that while you interpret Genesis literally you don’t think it’s really that important?”
And here we go again: When did I ever say it was no important? I never said that. Why are you making things up?
“Maybe if it’s not that important you should just forget about the whole thing.”
And there we are again. That has to be at least the fourth time now you have falsely accused me of saying it isn’t important. I corrected you the first time you did it and yet you’ve now done it three more times in just one post. Why do you keep making up things?
“In fact, if it’s not that important, why are you trying to arrange a seminar with the Kolbe Center at all? You seem somewhat conflicted.”
No, see a confused person would falsely accuse someone of saying something that he has never said. Oh, wait, you’ve done that now five times. FIVE TIMES.
ZC, if you’re going to keep inventing things out of thin air and calling Catholics anti-semites because they dare to disagree with you, then what’s the point of posting to you?
Get away with this stuff?
I have simply quoted scripture and nothing else. If I recall there were some pretty smart guys who never quoted or consulted Calvin or Zwingli such as, oh, say Paul the Apostle, Matthew, Mark, Luke, James, Jude, Peter, or John the Apostle. I don’t have to worry about what Calvin would have let met get away with because I have the Word of God. Calvin is not my final authority in all matters of faith and practice...The Word of God is.
“Oh, and don’t even get me started about how low class it is to call people anti-semites just because they disagree with you and defeat you in debates.”
I find that a lot. When they’re backed into a corner suddened one gets - pediphile priests, or the Inquision, Crusades etc., thrown at them. Here it’s anti-Semitism. Sigh.
By the way, you are correct. If I lived in Calvin or Zwingli’s time I might have have suffered the same fate as Servetus due merely to the fact that I am a Baptist.
“It is well established in the OT as well as the NT that human flesh and blood are not to be consumed...Certainly not a modern idea...”
The Eucharist Makes Present Jesus’ One Eternal Sacrifice; it’s Not Just a Symbolic Memorial
Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - the translation of Jesus’ words of consecration is “touto poieite tan eman anamnasin.” Jesus literally said “offer this as my memorial sacrifice.” The word “poiein” (do) refers to offering a sacrifice (see, e.g., Exodus 29:38-39, where God uses the same word – poieseis – regarding the sacrifice of the lambs on the altar). The word “anamnesis” (remembrance) also refers to a sacrifice which is really or actually made present in time by the power of God, as it reminds God of the actual event (see, e.g., Heb. 10:3; Num. 10:10). It is not just a memorial of a past event, but a past event made present in time.
In other words, the “sacrifice” is the “memorial” or “reminder.” If the Eucharist weren’t a sacrifice, Luke would have used the word “mnemosunon” (which is the word used to describe a nonsacrificial memorial. See, for example, Matt. 26:13; Mark 14:9; and especially Acts 10:4). So there are two memorials, one sacrificial (which Jesus instituted), and one non-sacrificial.
Lev. 24:7 - the word “memorial” in Hebrew in the sacrificial sense is “azkarah” which means to actually make present (see Lev. 2:2,9,16;5:12;6:5; Num.5:26 where “azkarah” refers to sacrifices that are currently offered and thus present in time). Jesus’ instruction to offer the bread and wine (which He changed into His body and blood) as a “memorial offering” demonstrates that the offering of His body and blood is made present in time over and over again.
Num. 10:10 - in this verse, “remembrance” refers to a sacrifice, not just a symbolic memorial. So Jesus’ command to offer the memorial “in remembrance” of Him demonstrates that the memorial offering is indeed a sacrifice currently offered. It is a re-presentation of the actual sacrifice made present in time. It is as if the curtain of history is drawn and Calvary is made present to us.
Mal. 1:10-11 - Jesus’ command to his apostles to offer His memorial sacrifice of bread and wine which becomes His body and blood fulfills the prophecy that God would reject the Jewish sacrifices and receive a pure sacrifice offered in every place. This pure sacrifice of Christ is sacramentally re-presented from the rising of the sun to its setting in every place, as Malachi prophesied.
Heb. 9:23 - in this verse, the author writes that the Old Testament sacrifices were only copies of the heavenly things, but now heaven has better “sacrifices” than these. Why is the heavenly sacrifice called “sacrifices,” in the plural? Jesus died once. This is because, while Christ’s sacrifice is transcendent in heaven, it touches down on earth and is sacramentally re-presented over and over again from the rising of the sun to its setting around the world by the priests of Christ’s Church. This is because all moments to God are present in their immediacy, and when we offer the memorial sacrifice to God, we ask God to make the sacrifice that is eternally present to Him also present to us. Jesus’ sacrifice also transcends time and space because it was the sacrifice of God Himself.
Heb. 9:23 - the Eucharistic sacrifice also fulfills Jer. 33:18 that His kingdom will consist of a sacrificial priesthood forever, and fulfills Zech. 9:15 that the sons of Zion shall drink blood like wine and be saved.
Heb. 13:15 - this “sacrifice of praise” refers to the actual sacrifice or “toda” offering of Christ who, like the Old Testament toda offerings, now must be consumed. See, for example, Lev. 7:12-15; 22:29-30 which also refer to the “sacrifice of praise” in connection with animals who had to be eaten after they were sacrificed.
1 Peter 2:5-6 - Peter says that we as priests offer “sacrifices” to God through Jesus, and he connects these sacrifices to Zion where the Eucharist was established. These sacrifices refer to the one eternal Eucharistic sacrifice of Christ offered in every place around the world.
Rom. 12:1 - some Protestants argue that the Eucharist is not really the sacrifice of Christ, but a symbolic offering, because the Lord’s blood is not shed (Heb. 9:22). However, Paul instructs us to present ourselves as a “living sacrifice” to God. This verse demonstrates that not all sacrifices are bloody and result in death (for example, see the wave offerings of Aaron in Num. 8:11,13,15,21 which were unbloody sacrifices). The Eucharistic sacrifice is unbloody and lifegiving, the supreme and sacramental wave offering of Christ, mysteriously presented in a sacramental way, but nevertheless the one actual and eternal sacrifice of Christ. Moreover, our bodies cannot be a holy sacrifice unless they are united with Christ’s sacrifice made present on the altar of the Holy Mass.
1 Cor. 10:16 - “the cup of blessing” or Third cup makes present the actual paschal sacrifice of Christ, the Lamb who was slain.
1 Cor. 10:18 - Paul indicates that what is eaten from the altar has been sacrificed, and we become partners with victim. What Catholic priests offer from the altar has indeed been sacrificed, our Lord Jesus, the paschal Lamb.
1 Cor. 10:20 - Paul further compares the sacrifices of pagans to the Eucharistic sacrifice - both are sacrifices, but one is offered to God. This proves that the memorial offering of Christ is a sacrifice.
1 Cor. 11:26 - Paul teaches that as often as you eat the bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death. This means that celebrating the Eucharist is proclaiming the Gospel.
1 Cor. 10:21 - Paul’s usage of the phrase “table of the Lord” in celebrating the Eucharist is further evidence that the Eucharist is indeed a sacrifice. The Jews always understood the phrase “table of the Lord” to refer to an altar of sacrifice. See, for example, Lev. 24:6, Ezek. 41:22; 44:16 and Malachi 1:7,12, where the phrase “table of the Lord” in these verses always refers to an altar of sacrifice.
Heb. 13:10,15 - this earthly altar is used in the Mass to offer the Eucharistic sacrifice of praise to God through our eternal Priest, Jesus Christ.
“I’ve never experienced a communion where the bread and wine became The Real Body and Blood of Jesus. Does it taste like beef?
Jesus - the Other White Meat?
If not, then the significance is spiritual, which aligns with the Protestant position.”
Jesus’ Passion links to the Passover Sacrifice where the Lamb Must Be Eaten
Matt. 26:2; Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7 - Jesus’ passion is clearly identified with the Passover sacrifice (where lambs were slain and eaten).
John 1:29,36; Acts 8:32; 1 Peter 1:19 - Jesus is described as the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. The Lamb must be sacrificed and eaten.
Luke 23:4,14; John 18:38; 19:4,6 - under the Old Covenant, the lambs were examined on Nisan 14 to ensure that they had no blemish. The Gospel writers also emphasize that Jesus the Lamb was examined on Nisan 14 and no fault was found in him. He is the true Passover Lamb which must be eaten.
Heb. 9:14 - Jesus offering Himself “without blemish” refers to the unblemished lamb in Exodus 12:5 which had to be consumed.
Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25 - Jesus is celebrating the Passover seder meal with the apostles which requires them to drink four cups of wine. But Jesus only presents the first three cups. He stops at the Third Cup (called “Cup of Blessing” - that is why Paul in 1 Cor. 10:16 uses the phrase “Cup of Blessing” to refer to the Eucharist – he ties the seder meal to the Eucharistic sacrifice). But Jesus conspicuously tells his apostles that He is omitting the Fourth Cup called the “Cup of Consummation.” The Gospel writers point this critical omission of the seder meal out to us to demonstrate that the Eucharistic sacrifice and the sacrifice on the cross are one and the same sacrifice, and the sacrifice would not be completed until Jesus drank the Fourth Cup on the cross.
Matt. 26:30; Mark 14:26 - they sung the great Hallel, which traditionally followed the Third Cup of the seder meal, but did not drink the Fourth Cup of Consummation. The Passover sacrifice had begun, but was not yet finished. It continued in the Garden of Gethsemane and was consummated on the cross.
Matt. 26:39; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42; John 18:11 - our Lord acknowledges He has one more cup to drink. This is the Cup of Consummation which he will drink on the cross.
Psalm 116:13 - this passage references this cup of salvation. Jesus will offer this Cup as both Priest and Victim. This is the final cup of the New Testament Passover.
Luke 22:44 - after the Eucharist, Jesus sweats blood in the garden of Gethsemane. This shows that His sacrifice began in the Upper Room and connects the Passion to the seder meal where the lamb must not only be sacrificed, but consumed.
Matt. 27:34; Mark 15:23 - Jesus, in his Passion, refuses to even drink an opiate. The writers point this out to emphasize that the final cup will be drunk on the cross, after the Paschal Lamb’s sacrifice is completed.
John 19:23 - this verse describes the “chiton” garment Jesus wore when He offered Himself on the cross. These were worn by the Old Testament priests to offer sacrifices. See Exodus 28:4; Lev. 16:4.
John 19:29; cf. Matt. 27:48; Mark 15:36; - Jesus is provided wine (the Fourth Cup) on a hyssop branch which was used to sprinkle the lambs’ blood in Exodus 12:22. This ties Jesus’ sacrifice to the Passover lambs which had to be consumed in the seder meal which was ceremonially completed by drinking the Cup of Consummation. Then in John 19:30, Jesus says, “It is consummated.” The sacrifice began in the upper room and was completed on the cross. God’s love for humanity is made manifest.
Matt. 27:45; Mark 15:33; John 19:14 - the Gospel writers confirm Jesus’ death at the sixth hour, just when the Passover lambs were sacrificed. Again, this ties Jesus’ death to the death of the Passover lambs. Like the Old Covenant, in the New Covenant, the Passover Lamb must be eaten.
1 Cor. 5:7 - Paul tells us that the Lamb has been sacrificed. But what do we need to do? Some Protestants say we just need to accept Jesus as personal Lord and Savior.
1 Cor. 5:8 - But Paul says that we need to celebrate the Eucharistic feast. This means that we need to eat the Lamb. We need to restore communion with God.
Heb. 13:15 - “sacrifice of praise” or “toda” refers to the thanksgiving offerings of Lev. 7:12-15; 22:29-30 which had to be eaten.
1 Cor. 10:16 - Paul’s use of the phrase “the cup of blessing” refers to the Third Cup of the seder meal. This demonstrates that the seder meal is tied to Christ’s Eucharistic sacrifice.
John 19:34-35 - John conspicuously draws attention here. The blood (Eucharist) and water (baptism) make the fountain that cleanses sin as prophesied in Zech 13:1. Just like the birth of the first bride came from the rib of the first Adam, the birth of the second bride (the Church) came from the rib of the second Adam (Jesus). Gen. 2:22.
John 7:38 - out of His Heart shall flow rivers of living water, the Spirit. Consequently, Catholics devote themselves to Jesus’ Sacred Heart.
Matt. 2:1, Luke 2:4-7 - Jesus the bread of life was born in a feeding trough in the city of Bethlehem, which means “house of bread.”
Luke 2: 7,12 - Jesus was born in a “manger” (which means “to eat”). This symbolism reveals that Jesus took on flesh and was born to be food for the salvation of the world.
bdeaner and other posters have already discussed this but here you go again. Now you can never say you didn’t know.
"1 Cor. 5:7 - Paul tells us that the Lamb has been sacrificed. But what do we need to do? Some Protestants say we just need to accept Jesus as personal Lord and Savior. 1 Cor. 5:8 - But Paul says that we need to celebrate the Eucharistic feast. This means that we need to eat the Lamb. We need to restore communion with God."
What scripture actually says: "For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8`Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."
That hardly suggests the communion wafer becomes the actual flesh of Jesus.
In a spiritual sense, we are certainly supposed to take Communion very serious. Those who take it lightly are profaning holy ground. But none of the verses you quote indicate that the wafer is the flesh of Jesus, sacrificed again.
An earlier post has more to think about, and I'll attempt a reply tomorrow.
AWESOME POSTS!!! You laid it all down and put it all right out there for anyone to see, plain as day. How can anyone seriously dispute the Real Presence?!?!? Totally, thoroughly, undeniably SCRIPTURAL through and through, if only one has the eyes to see and the ears to hear the Truth readily available to us in the Scriptures.
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.