Replies

Who denies it's a problem? Some people just don't know how to have fun.

"What do I know?" is a very good starting point. I've said before that from a purely innerleckshual POV the Eucharist is a great problem because it calls on so many basic questions, even before we get to the Xty and revelation part. And once we get there, my brain gets even more fried than it already is.

I'm not sure how usefully to respond to the paraclete question except to say that we think (a)the paradigmatic prayer is addressed to the Father, through the Son in (and with, and by, and most of the other prepositions hanging around) the Spirit; and (b)the "Great Thanksgiving" ought to conform closely to the paradigmatic prayer. So it is addressed to God the Father, and asks, well, many things, but among them is that the Holy Spirit make the "gifts" holy.

And we don't "task" the Spirit, we ask the Father to do so, (and sometimes the Son, but less often). It's important, I think, to note the precatory, rather than commanding, language. We trust in God's promise, but we don't come to Him with contract in hand saying, "Hey. It says right here ...."

And again, on the whole flesh v. spirit issue, it ain't so clear neither.

If we do hard-line Thomism, the "body" is the body of Christ as it currently is. So that means it is the "substance" (and PLEASE remember that does NOT mean "The stuff that it's made of"; it means the "quiddity", the "what it IS, bro," of a thing) of resurrected body, which Paul SEEMS to say is a (alert: stand by for mind destruction) "spiritual body".

Oh good. That makes it SEW much clearer.

Not.

It seems to me the witness is that Christ is "really" present "there" (somehow). Lateran IV "baptizes" a way to say that, a language for the mystery, but it SHO don't explain it.

And I THINK the main difference, on the ground, between us and most Protestants is enshrined in the word "there". (That MAY be because I have a phenomenological sense of "real", and I may be in error in that -- as well as in a zillion other things.)

But I think many if not most Protestants would go with (a)The Spiritual is the "Real" that matters -- that other "real" stuff vanishes like the flower that fades; and (b) therefore Christ is really enough present in the faithful in the observation of the "ordinance". (What caliber is that there ord'nance?)

So in my exploratory conjecture, the difference is indicated less in "real" than in "there".

I trust I make myself obscure.