Pope Francis holding the monstrance on Corpus Christi (May 30 in Rome)
Posted on 06/02/2013 11:49:33 AM PDT by NYer
On this Feast of the Body and Blood of Christ, it’s good to remember the words of Saint Thomas Aquinas:
Almighty and Eternal God, behold I come to the sacrament of Your only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. As one sick I come to the Physician of life; unclean, to the Fountain of mercy; blind, to the Light of eternal splendor; poor and needy to the Lord of heaven and earth. Therefore, I beg of You, through Your infinite mercy and generosity, heal my weakness, wash my uncleanness, give light to my blindness, enrich my poverty, and clothe my nakedness. May I thus receive the Bread of Angels, the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords, with such reverence and humility, contrition and devotion, purity and faith, purpose and intention, as shall aid my soul’s salvation.
This is the humble attitude with which we should both enter the church building (because the Blessed Sacrament is reserved there) and approach the Blessed Sacrament at Holy Communion.
The reason for our humility is that the glorified and risen Lord is present here in the Bread of Angels. The Eucharist is not a manmade symbol for an absent reality, a mere reminder of times past.
Rather, as Saint Thomas prayed in his Prayer after Communion: “I thank You, Lord, Almighty Father, Everlasting God, for having been pleased, through no merit of mine, but of Your great mercy alone, to feed me, a sinner, and Your unworthy servant, with the precious Body and Blood of Your Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.” The Blessed Eucharist is the Body and Blood of the Son of God. It is the only thing worthy of the worship that is given to God alone for that very reason.
How different would the attitude be in our churches if Christ’s Real Presence were taken seriously? Rather than trying to make our churches like movie houses or secular meeting spaces or – worse – copying other religions, perhaps we could make them houses of the Blessed Sacrament, oases of the guaranteed presence of Christ in a secular world.
Pope Francis holding the monstrance on Corpus Christi (May 30 in Rome)
The celebration of the Eucharist is not a closed, feel-good moment, private to our parish or even to our family. Eucharistic Prayer I says very clearly: “by the hands of your holy angel this offering may be born to your altar in heaven in the sight of your divine majesty so as we receive communion at this altar. . .we may be filled with every grace and blessing.” We join the liturgy of Heaven that showers its grace upon earth.
We need to be personally close to Christ for our spiritual survival, but this is not at all an individualistic concept. As John Paul II exhorted us: “The Church and the world have a great need for Eucharistic worship. Jesus awaits us in this sacrament of love. Let us not refuse the time to go to meet him in adoration, in contemplation full of faith and open to make amends for the serious offenses and crimes of the world.”
So alongside our reaching for an ever deeper appreciation and awe for the Body and Blood of Christ – which is already countercultural in our confused time – we have to learn something about the effects of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection.
One of them is that “our unity is the fruit of Calvary, and results from the Mass’s application to us of the fruits of the Passion, with a view to our final redemption.”(Henri de Lubac) So being Christian depends on our actually being open to the mystery at the heart of our redemption, the life, death and resurrection of Christ. In fact, our whole approach to the Body and Blood of Christ will be a good indicator of whether we even grasp the central mystery of our faith in love.
Relearning our faith so that it is not individualized (the Protestant position), but rather something that, as Christ’s own Church, joins us more deeply to Christ and each other is predicated on our approaching the Blessed Sacrament as Thomas Aquinas did. The individualism that we have been schooled in for years – and that comes to us in TV shows, in the speeches of politicians, in how we conceive of school and work – will take serious effort to overcome.
It represents a grave distortion of the social way of life for which we were created. Vatican II taught the simple truth that: “God, Who has fatherly concern for everyone, has willed that all men should constitute one family and treat one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”
We cannot expect to steep ourselves in the individualism of the culture and then regard our subsequent attitudes as Catholic. These are two irreconcilable realities. And to think otherwise is to imagine that there is no particular truth in Catholicism.
To deny the Church as the Body of Christ is to deny who Jesus Christ is, the one who is God incarnate and present among us in a special way, as we celebrate today.
“It was not vinegar, it was “oxos”, a cheap and sour old wine mixed with water that was drunk by Roman soldiers.”
Notice you didn’t quote my response, since it would mean quoting the scripture.
The drink mentioned was the one He had in His hand at the Lord’s Supper, “the blood” of the covenant, which He declared He would not drink again until He was with the Apostles “in my Father’s kingdom.” Not on the cross.
Mat 26:27-29 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; (28) For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. (29) But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.
Yes, and that's apostate and disgusting, but communicants of Rembert Weakland and Thomas Gumbleton shouldn't throw stones.
I believe you are greeatly mistaken.
Ah, but I am not...I will pray for you, Sir. May you see the light, shining out of darkness...the darkness of man made religion.
Do you use a 1611, NIV or red letter?
Get it, we’re having a long conversation when I get home.
If you have anything on the fathers of the church, from 1st to 3rd century, bring that too. Unless you know more than those taught by John himself.
Bring your Greek as well.
“Do you use a 1611, NIV or red letter?
Get it, we’re having a long conversation when I get home.
If you have anything on the fathers of the church, from 1st to 3rd century, bring that too. Unless you know more than those taught by John himself.
Bring your Greek as well.”
Been there, done that. See post #35, among all the rest in this thread.
No Augustine in the Twelve Apostles -- Amazing, what reading the Bible does for one!
“Hmmm.....Augustine huh — an apostle?’
Why do you throw at me these stupid things? Where did I say Augustine is an Apostle?
Does your God follow rules like that, that you make up? My God expects ME to follow they rules HE set up, not the other way around.
See post #35 for Christ’s actual rules, not the RCC’s.
God cannot do some things. He cannot contradict his nature and He cannot lie.
If that is God “following rules,” than I guess we serve a different God.
YES
The Bible Itself states that their are "oral" teachings and traditions that are to be carried on to the present-day (2 Thessalonians 2:15
2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle
That have been taught...Period...NOT, that will be taught...And since your religion hasn't (ever) been able to come up with a tradition that has been passed on orally from one of the Apostles or disciples who were spiritually inspired to create the scriptures, we all know that nothing like that ever existed...
The actual verse says to 'hold fast to the traditions that YOU HAVE BEEN TAUGHT...And the reference is to the written word...
There is absolutely NOTHING about instituting new traditions and that are to be carried on to the present day...
1Co 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
Same here...The ordinances that I delivered (past tense) to you...Nothing future...
These teachings are what the Catholic Church considers "Sacred Apostolic Tradition." This type of "Tradition" never changes because it was passed down by the Apostles themselves.
Completely untrue??? Unless you can show some scripture where it is claimed that oral tradition will be something to be instituted in the futue...And you can't...It doesn't exist...Any oral tradition is long gone with the authors of scripture...
In fact, as Christians, we are suppose to disassociate ourselves from persons who do not follow Apostolic Tradition (2 Thessalonians 3:6) 2Th 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.
HaHaHa...You guys are something else...Paul is assuming that people in the future would know the traditions that were received from the inspired writers of scripture...You have any oral traditions that passed on from Paul??? Of course you don't...No one does...So was Paul wrong??? Absolutely not...Whatever was spoken is the same that was written...
If oral tradition is not to be followed, why did St. Paul state Christ said something that is not recorded in the Gospels (Acts 20:35)?
Because it wasn't said to anyone by Jesus who was around during the time the Gospels took place...
St. Paul must have "heard" this saying, not read it from any Gospel or "Scripture," thereby, proving that some things Christ said were not recorded in the Gospels (John 21:25) and were passed on orally among His disciples instead,
Act 20:35 I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.
Oh brother...Everything in the gospels in red letters was passed down from the oral teaching of Jesus...
but were just as valid as anything written since St. Paul himself used one of these oral passages in one of his own epistles.
What kind of convoluted thinking is that??? Paul recorded what he heard Jesus say just as the apostle John recorded what he heard Jesus say...
But no...Jesus doesn't give any new revelation or so called oral tradition to anyone in your religion...God has set the course...God has set the prophecy...God has set the doctrine...God gave us everything we need to know in writing for our salvation and assurance...
Just like this little piece you posted here...It didn't come from God...It came from very fallible men who have twisted God's scripture for an agenda...One that is contrary to what God teaches his own sheep...
Paul also said, "Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself" (1 Cor. 11:27, 29).
"To answer for the body and blood" of someone meant to be guilty of a crime as serious as homicide. How could eating mere bread and wine "unworthily" be so serious? Paul’s comment makes sense only if the bread and wine became the real body and blood of Christ.
So you guys are actually killing Jesus during your Eucharist...But you're not guilty because you are doing it worthily...
But no, Paul's comment only makes sense if one knows and believes the scriptures and can see beyond this convoluted Catholic explanation of killing Jesus and eating his flesh and blood...
Here's the actual scripture...
1Co 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
1Co 11:24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
Jesus didn't turn bread into his flesh...All Jesus did was to give thanks for the bread...
1Co 11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
Jesus did not say this is a cup of my blood...Jesus said it is a 'new testament' in (not of) his blood...
1Co 11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
You show the Lord's death...It is a symbol...To show someone...
1Co 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
1Co 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
Examine yourself...What is your motive for eating/drinking??? Get prayed up...
1Co 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
The body you just killed??? You don't believe you just killed the body and drank the blood??? Of course not...
If you don't discern the body that was Crucified on the Cross...We are to break the bread and eat and drink as we remember the Crucifixion and what it stands for...And if we do not discern the body of Jesus on the Cross while we are eating and drinking???
1Co 11:30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
1Co 11:31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
I am not in darkness. But those who deny the truth of Christ are.
Even St. Paul ordained Timothy and Titus to serve the people in churches.
That’s why I asked if you were an ordained priest?
Sir??
LOL!
You need to click on my name.
The topic was apostles and you quoted Augustine.
LOL!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3026458/posts?page=97#97
Oh, so you mean the “SACRED TRADITION” is out of bounds now? GOOD.
So where in the scripture does it say the Lord’s Supper was to be practiced on SUNDAY? Maybe the Book of Acts? Since you asserted the Apostles went to synagogue on SATURDAY and then to service on Sunday.
Post #35 does not refute, it confirms that the Eucharist is the True Presence of the Christ: Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity.
The Catholic doctrine of the Real Presence is the belief that Jesus Christ is literally, not symbolically, present in the Holy Eucharist—body, blood, soul and divinity. Catholics believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist because Jesus tells us this is true in the Bible:
“I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh. The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’ So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him” (John 6:48-56).
Furthermore, the early Church Fathers either imply or directly state that the bread and wine offered in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper is really the body and blood of Jesus Christ. In other words, the doctrine of the Real Presence that Catholics believe today was believed by the earliest Christians 2,000 years ago!
This miracle of God’s physical presence to us at every Mass is the truest testament to Christ’s love for us and His desire for each of us to have a personal relationship with Him.
More Scripture about the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist
“Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood”
• (John 6:53-56 RSV) So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; {54} he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. {55} For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. {56} He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him
Ok, Ms Salvation...but your glib comment does not get you off answering my comment to you.
As to being ordained, yes. I am a priest after the order of Melchizedek.
“For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham, returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, to whom Abraham gave a tenth part of all, first being translated “king of righteousness,” and then also king of Salem, meaning, “king of peace,” without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest continually” (Heb. 7:1-3).
So what does that mean??? Were there eyeballs on the bread???
I'm guessing that what might have gotten their attention more than the bread what when Jesus went 'poof', now ya see me, now ya don't...They broke and ate bread every day...This was no different...
No Catholic Mass there...
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.