Posted on 04/22/2010 9:55:26 PM PDT by Salvation
This website surveys the origin and development of Roman Catholic Christianity from the period of the apostolic church, through the post-apostolic church and into the conciliar movement. Principal attention is paid to the biblical basis of both doctrine and dogma as well as the role of paradosis (i.e. handing on the truth) in the history of the Church. Particular attention is also paid to the hierarchical founding and succession of leadership throughout the centuries.
This is a set of lecture notes used since 1985 to teach the basis for key doctrines and dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church. The objectives of the course were, and are:
The course grew out of the need for the authors to continually answer questions about their faith tradition and their work. (Both authors are active members of Catholic parish communities in the Diocese of Richmond, Virginia. Dr. Robert Schihl was a Professor and Associate Dean of the School of Communication and the Arts at Regent University. Paul Flanagan is a consultant specializing in preparing people for technology based changes.) At the time these notes were first prepared, the authors were spending time in their faith community answering questions about their Protestant Evangelical workplaces (Mr. Flanagan was then a senior executive at the Christian Broadcasting Network), and time in their workplaces answering similar questions about their Roman Catholic faith community. These notes are the result of more than a decade of facilitating dialogue among those who wish to learn more about what the Roman Catholic Church teaches and why.
Opportunities of Grace: The Eucharist: The Lord's Supper
Roman Catholic Christians share with most Christians the faith that Jesus Christ, on the night he was betrayed, ate a final or last supper with his Apostles. This final meal was also the celebration of the Jewish Passover or Feast of the Unleavened Bread which commemorated the passing over of the Jews from the death in slavery to the Egyptians to life in the Promised Land.
Christians differ in the meaning this Last Supper has to them and the Church today. Catholic Christians together with other historical Christian Churches (e.g., Eastern Orthodox and Byzantine Christians, Lutherans, Anglicans and some Episcopalians, etc.) believe the literal words of Jesus - that the bread and wine are truly his body and blood. Other later Christian Churches profess a mere symbolic meaning to the words of Jesus.
The faith of the Catholic Church is based on both a fundamental principle of hermeneutics and the constant faith of the Church from Apostolic times.
The Catholic Church teaches that the first principle of hermeneutics--the science of the translation and interpretation of the Bible--is the literal meaning of the text.
The first writer of the New Testament was the apostle Paul. His Letter to the Corinthians was written as early as 56 AD, earlier than the first Gospel, Mark's, written about 64 AD. Paul was also not an eyewitness to what he wrote but testifies to his source.
The next New Testament text in chronological order would have been Mark's Gospel. Written about 64 AD, in Rome, Mark, not an eyewitness, probably heard the account of the Last Supper he recorded from the Apostle Peter.
The third account of the Last Supper could be Matthew's. Matthew, the tax collector Levi, was an eyewitness to the meal. He was one of the twelve Apostles. Matthew probably wrote his Gospel in the 70's.
Luke's account of the Last Supper, written from the standpoint of a Gentile convert and a non-eyewitness, probably heard the details of the Last Supper from Paul. Luke was a traveling companion of Paul. Luke also wrote in the 70's.
The beloved disciple, John, the last of the New Testament writers, wrote his Gospel in the 90's. John was an eyewitness to the events of the Last Supper (Jn 6:30-68).
Hence Catholic Christian belief in the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist rests upon the literal meaning of the words of the Last Supper as recorded by the Evangelists and Paul.
The uniformity of expression across the first four authors affirms the literalness. Belief in the real presence demands faith--the basis of new life as called for by Christ throughout scripture. But faith in signs conferring what they signify is the basis also for the Incarnation--appearances belying true meaning. The true significance of the real presence is sealed in John's gospel. Five times in different expressions, Jesus confirmed the reality of what he means.
The best way a person can make a clear literal point is repetition of the same message in different ways. Jesus did this. Those around him clearly understood what he was saying--cannibalism and the drinking of blood--both forbidden by Mosaic Law.
Had these disciples mistaken the meaning of Jesus' words, Jesus would surely have known and corrected them. He didn't. They had clearly understood his meaning--Jesus' flesh was to be really eaten; his blood to be really drunk.
Non believers often respond that even at the Last Supper, the apostles did not sense that they had flesh in their hands and blood in their cup. But Jesus is God. The creative literalness of the words: "This is my body; this is my blood" must be believed. God cannot lie. And God can turn bread into flesh and wine into blood without the appearances of bread and wine changing.
Medieval philosophers and theologians called this expression of Divine Truth and Creative Power "transubstantiation". Yes, God can change the substance of any created matter while the appearances remain unchanged. And this demands faith.
Paul confirms elsewhere in his letters the reality of the real presence.
The persuasion of the Church from Apostolic times about the objective reality of these words of Christ is clear from many documents.
Irenaeus (Asia Minor, 140 - 202), Tertullian (Rome, 160 - 220), Cyprian (Carthage, 200 - 258) are just a few of the earliest who attest to the objective reality of the words of Christ.
In the Church in Alexandria, Athanasius (293 - 373) and Cyril (376 - 444) equally attest to the literal meaning of the words of Christ at the Last Supper.
In the Church in Palestine, Cyril (Jerusalem, 315 - 387) and Epiphanius (Salamis, 367 - 403) also affirm in their teaching the same reality.
Unanimity is found across the universal church until the 11th century. Berengar (Tours, France, 1000 - 1088) was one of the first to deny the real presence by arguing that Christ is not physically present, but only symbolically.
The Council of Rome (a local council), 1079, taught against Berengar that the Eucharist is truly the body and blood of Christ.
By the 16th century, some Reformers (excluding Luther) also taught that Christ's presence in the Eucharist was only figurative or metaphorical. Since there were other opinions being taught as truth (figurative presence and metaphorical presence) a teaching authority (see Chapter 5) had to be appealed to discern error from the truth. The way of the Church was to follow the model of Acts 15.
The Council of Trent (1545 - 1563) defined the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and the Eucharist as both the continuing sacrifice of Christ and a real sacrament. The institution of the Eucharist as sacrament was contained in the words "Do this in remembrance of me."
Roman Catholic Christians celebrate the Eucharist in the liturgical act called the Mass. The word Mass comes from the Latin missa ("sent"). It was taken from the formula for dismissing the congregation: Ite missa est ("Go, the Eucharist has been sent forth") referring to the ancient custom of sending consecrated bread from the bishop's Mass to the sick and to the other churches.
The Mass contains two parts: the liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. The Liturgy of the Word is a copy of the Jewish synagogue service of the first century: readings from Scripture followed by responses from the congregation often from the Book of Psalms. The Liturgy of the Eucharist is a reenactment of the Last Supper. A celebrant does what Christ did: take bread and wine and say the same words Christ said and then share the now consecrated bread and wine with the congregation.
Roman Catholics believe that the bread and wine become the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ and remain such until the elements are entirely consumed. The Body and Blood not consumed at one Eucharist are reserved for the next celebration of the Eucharist and venerated as the Body and Blood of Jesus.
Roman Catholic Christians take the word of God seriously and seek to remember Christ in the Last Supper "as often as" possible. And in doing this proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.
Catholic Christians also believe that there is only one sacrifice, Jesus', but following the command "as often as" to proclaim the death of the Lord, the sacrifice of Christ is made physically present to every Christian in all places in every age. The Eucharist makes the atemporal aphysical actions of Christ's redeeming action truly present to us always and everywhere. This is incarnational.
Following the word of God, Catholics also know that Christ is not and cannot be resacrificed. This has never been the teaching of the Catholic Church.
The constant faith of the Church from the Apostolic Fathers attests to the fact that the Mass was the one Sacrifice of Calvary made present to the faithful.
The 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church makes this statement explicitly.
The Roman Catholic Church through history approached her faith life with the clarification of language. That is, she translated the essentials of revealed faith into the vocabulary of living language.
Transubstantiation reflects Roman Catholic faith in the literalness of the words of the Bible.
Jesus (omnipotent God) said: "This is my body; this is my blood." And again Jesus said: "I am the bread of life;" "My flesh is true food; my blood is true drink;" "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood ...;" etc.
Roman Catholics take Jesus at His word: the bread is his body; the wine is his blood.
From the Apostles at the Last Supper until today, the bread and wine of Eucharist looks and feels and tastes like bread and wine in the eating and drinking.
Similar to all of God's Word, faith is essential. Faith in what? In the words of Jesus even though the bread does not look, feel, taste like flesh; even though the wine does not look, feel, taste like blood.
Medieval philosophers and theologians sought simply to label this simple biblical faith: Jesus said that bread is his body and wine is his blood even though it did not appear to change into visible flesh and blood.
Transubstantiation means the substance part of the bread and wine elements changes; but the accidental parts--sight, taste, smell, touch--do not. Catholics believe that since Jesus said it and He is God, he can do it. They believe! "Transubstantiation" merely labels it.
In everyday life, it is not at all uncommon to believe in things man cannot perceive by the senses: wind, electricity, love, peace, etc. All the more when Jesus says it.
has to be reenacted
The Holy Mass is not a reenactment. It is "declaring the death of the Lord until He comes again" (1 Cor 11:26). That very sacrifice of our Lord is declared, -- or simply, shown -- to the celebrants.
where in that verse, in context with the rest of the passage, does it say that one has to be anything other than a Christian?
That passage doesn't. However, the First Mass was celebrated by none other than Jesus; then He told the twelve Apostles "do this" (Lk 22:19). In many places in the gospel the commandment to stand for Christ is given to select people but not to all (John 13:20, 20:21, Luke 10:16). The apostles have authority because they are sent by Christ: Romans 10:15, Acts 19:15. Further, restrictive rules of ordaining a priest are spelled out in Timothy and Titus. Surely anyone can reflect on the death of Jesus any time with or without a meal; but to confect the Eucharist is a faculty that is shown to be given the select few.
How in the world is that a "sacrifice"?
Death of the Lord is not sacrifice? St. Paul speaks in that passage of the body of the Lord, slain for our sin, present at the Altar. How would you describe it if not sacrifice.
the Bible never draws any distinction between the aspect of a person and the office he holds
The Holy Orders does indeed change the very soul of the consecrated person.
Hebrews English: Douay-Rheims Greek NT: Byzantine/Majority Text (2000) Hebrews 9
25. Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holies, every year with the blood of others: ουδ ινα πολλακις προσφερη εαυτον ωσπερ ο αρχιερευς εισερχεται εις τα αγια κατ ενιαυτον εν αιματι αλλοτριω 26. For then he ought to have suffered often from the beginning of the world: but now once at the end of ages, he hath appeared for the destruction of sin, by the sacrifice of himself. επει εδει αυτον πολλακις παθειν απο καταβολης κοσμου νυν δε απαξ επι συντελεια των αιωνων εις αθετησιν αμαρτιας δια της θυσιας αυτου πεφανερωται 27. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment: και καθ οσον αποκειται τοις ανθρωποις απαξ αποθανειν μετα δε τουτο κρισις 28. So also Christ was offered once to exhaust the sins of many; the second time he shall appear without sin to them that expect him unto salvation. ουτως και ο χριστος απαξ προσενεχθεις εις το πολλων ανενεγκειν αμαρτιας εκ δευτερου χωρις αμαρτιας οφθησεται τοις αυτον απεκδεχομενοις εις σωτηριαν
There is nothing here that is not adequately translated into English, as far as I can tell. What this chapter explains is that unlike in Judaism where sacrifices of anuimals were repeatedly made, in Christianity there is but one sacrifice offered by Christ; all these ritualistic sacrifices of sheep and pigeons are now rendered meaningless.
Your puzzlement comes (I presume) from the notion that the Holy Mass is some sort of repeated sacrifice which then would be in contradiction with this passage. The Mass however is not a repeated sacrifice but the very sacrifice of Golgotha. The Church was instructed to do as follows:
This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me. 26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew [or declare] the death of the Lord, until he come. (1 Cor 11, following Luke 22)
As you can see there ss a commandment to "do this" and in fact, do this "often", but the Eucharist is never separated from the one, historical sacrifice of the Cross. What is changing from Mass to Mass is not the sacrifice but the celebrants as they are shown the sacrifice and given the Precious Body and Blood again and again, allowing the faithful to abide in Christ and Christ in them (John 14:4-7).
A believer in the Holy Scripture, as he reads it, would be well advised to learn from it rather than fight it. So, in that spirit or reasoning faith of a Catholic, when I read Rev 12:6, I say to myself “Aha, so Mary fled into the wilderness that God had prepared for her”.
Why is this passage surprising to you? I admit that it could be read in two ways, as a reference to Mary’s travel to Ephesus to escape persecutions, or as an allusion to her Assumtion, and given the visionary genre of the book it probably should be read in those both senses simultaneously.
“He died only once, but he dies mystically and spiritually every time mass is offered.” John Hardon
Not LITERALLY, since His literal flesh and blood are SUPPOSEDLY present?
http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/Mass/Mass_008.htm
You can have your mysticism.
So which part of the Gospel do you disagree with here? He died once; the Eucharist declares His death; and His body is present on the altar.
No, His body is nor present on your altars. His resurrected body, flesh and bone, by the way, not flesh and blood, is just that — resurrected. Jesus is no longer being offered, or “served up for dinner” according to your view.
That's contrary to what the scripture tells us.
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.