Posted on 04/27/2008 3:36:18 AM PDT by markomalley
The Catholic Church teaches that in the Eucharist, the communion wafer and the altar wine are transformed and really become the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Have you ever met anyone who has found this Catholic doctrine to be a bit hard to take?
If so, you shouldn't be surprised. When Jesus spoke about eating his flesh and drinking his blood in John 6, his words met with less than an enthusiastic reception. "How can this man give us his flesh to eat? (V 52). "This is a hard saying who can listen to it?" (V60). In fact so many of his disciples abandoned him over this that Jesus had to ask the twelve if they also planned to quit. It is interesting that Jesus did not run after his disciples saying, "Don't go — I was just speaking metaphorically!" How did the early Church interpret these challenging words of Jesus? Interesting fact. One charge the pagan Romans lodged against the Christians was cannibalism. Why? You guessed it. They heard that this sect regularly met to eat human flesh and drink human blood. Did the early Christians say: "wait a minute, it's only a symbol!"? Not at all. When trying to explain the Eucharist to the Roman Emperor around 155AD, St. Justin did not mince his words: "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 . . . is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus."
Not many Christians questioned the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist till the Middle Ages. In trying to explain how bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ, several theologians went astray and needed to be corrected by Church authority. Then St. Thomas Aquinas came along and offered an explanation that became classic. In all change that we observe in this life, he teaches, appearances change, but deep down, the essence of a thing stays the same. Example: if, in a fit of mid-life crisis, I traded my mini-van for a Ferrari, abandoned my wife and 5 kids to be beach bum, got tanned, bleached my hair blonde, spiked it, buffed up at the gym, and took a trip to the plastic surgeon, I'd look a lot different on the surface. But for all my trouble, deep down I'd still substantially be the same ole guy as when I started.
St. Thomas said the Eucharist is the one instance of change we encounter in this world that is exactly the opposite. The appearances of bread and wine stay the same, but the very essence or substance of these realities, which can't be viewed by a microscope, is totally transformed. What was once bread and wine are now Christ's body and blood. A handy word was coined to describe this unique change. Transformation of the "sub-stance", what "stands-under" the surface, came to be called "transubstantiation."
What makes this happen? The power of God's Spirit and Word. After praying for the Spirit to come (epiklesis), the priest, who stands in the place of Christ, repeats the words of the God-man: "This is my Body, This is my Blood." Sounds to me like Genesis 1: the mighty wind (read "Spirit") whips over the surface of the water and God's Word resounds. "Let there be light" and there was light. It is no harder to believe in the Eucharist than to believe in Creation. But why did Jesus arrange for this transformation of bread and wine? Because he intended another kind of transformation. The bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ which are, in turn, meant to transform us. Ever hear the phrase: "you are what you eat?" The Lord desires us to be transformed from a motley crew of imperfect individuals into the Body of Christ, come to full stature.
Our evangelical brethren speak often of an intimate, personal relationship with Jesus. But I ask you, how much more personal and intimate can you get? We receive the Lord's body into our physical body that we may become Him whom we receive! Such an awesome gift deserves its own feast. And that's why, back in the days of Thomas Aquinas and St. Francis of Assisi, the Pope decided to institute the Feast of Corpus Christi.
Gosh, Batman, er - no - that’s on a different forum.
Yikes! Blue-duncan. Millions of RCs took only the cracker for boo-coo years because the RC “priests” were ‘fraid the common folk would spill Christ out of the cup. Couldn’t allow that, now could we? Must keep “the elements” properly stored in a monstrosity (or something like that) to protect it, er - God, - and to allow deceived people to worship the cracker and the wine.
All must be in order for the religion to work.
Speak for yourself.
Says who?
There ya go again . . . trying to teach snorting critters with curly tails to sing . . .
I think you know by now that the RC edifice is not interested in UNrubberized historical TRUTH! LOL.
There is a very good example of the absence of Christian charity. Rather than speak with respect what fellow Christians believe, you mock and sneer.
It speaks volumes about you.
“Says who?”
This is from Frank J. Sheed
“We look at the bread the priest uses in the Sacrament. It is white, round, soft. The whiteness is not the bread, it is simply a quality that the bread has; the same is true of the roundness and the softness. There is something there that has these and other properties, qualities, attributes- the philosophers call all of them accidents. Whiteness and roundness we see; softness brings in the sense of touch. We might smell bread, and the smell of new bread is wonderful, but once again the smell is not the bread, but simply a property. The something which has the whiteness, the softness, the roundness, has the smell; and if we try another sense, the sense of taste, the same something has that special effect upon our palate.
In other words, whatever the senses perceive-even with the aid of those instruments men are forever inventing to increase the reach of the senses- is always of this same sort, a quality, a property, an attribute; no sense perceives the something which has all these qualities, which is the thing itself. This something is what the philosophers call substance; the rest are accidents which it possesses. Our senses perceive accidents; only the mind knows the substance”
Some folks seek out a chance to be offended . . . like hogs seek out truffles . . . then take the
opportunity
to be offended into their bellies and amplify it . . . regurgitate it and spew it all around quite liberally.
Then they congratulate themselves on how righteous they and their actions are.
Doesn’t sound like the Jesus I know nor His priorities.
My my, the library is expanding . . .
—RUBBER HISTORIES
—RUBBER ‘SCRIPTURE’
—RUBBER DICTIONARIES
—RUBBER LOGIC BOOKS
—RUBBER MATH
—RUBBER GRADING CRITERIA
and, now, drum roll . . .
—RUBBER PHOTO ALBUMS!
I’m soooooooo impressed with all that rubber. Is the RC edifice planning to go into . . .
the tire business?
Allow me to be more clear: While the accidents of bread and wine remain, so too the Real Presence remains. When those accidents no longer remain, neither does the Real Presence.
Protestants are fond of quoting the Council of Trent. It’s all set forth in the conciliar documents.
Then I’d have to be concerned about working out a solution to the comprehension challenges for the readers.
The Bible was Maintained by the RC for many a Century... before the Reformation!
So man-up and do it. The readers are intelligent and comprehend conversational American English.
Multicolor spasms of bold italic logorrhea do not meet the test of serious adult discourse. In fact, the Playskool word salad routine makes you look foolish.
however, that has NOTHING to do with what language Jesus spoke in.
= = =
And what rubber authority was that assumption based on?
“NOTHING” is a pretty big word in that context.
Fascinating.
Unless you were there, you have no idea what He spoke, except for what is recorded. In Jerusalem at that time, Hebrew, Roman, Greek, Aramaic, even Babylonian and a host of other languages were in use. Jerusalem was not a dusty backwater, it was a center of trade and sophistication.
INDEED, INDEED, INDEED!
So Peter listened to Jesus in Aramaic and then translated the Aramaic to Greek before he wrote it into scripture???
= = =
Yeah, according to
RUBBER HISTORY VOL 669
You see, he was a VERY talented fisherman.
Why I hear tell, that when he was out on the Sea of G . . .
in typical pebble fashion, he’d doff his clothes to be more at one with the raw elements . . . better to learn the art of translation from the coming apparitions . . .
And, sure enough, about the time the fish quit biting,
Along would come a flock of white hankies dancing just above the waves.
One by one they would hold themselves in front of Pebble’s eyes . . . so he could clearly see the translation lesson brilliantly emblazoned thereon.
And, he found that whenever he studied with the aid of the dancing doilys . . . he had photographic memory—reportedly the first in history to have that.
Thus began the long route (for a fiesty fisherman, rather understandably long)—the long route to a Master’s Degree in Hanky Translation Linguistics.
It’s reported that Magnificent Magical Earth-Mother Mary herself made an appearance to award him his sheepskin. It’s still debated whether the craft she road in on was saucer shaped or triangular.
Whatever shape, she appeared in all her techy auras and bonked the new Master’s Degreed formerly thick-headed fisherman on the head with a rolled up hanky thereby insuring that he was degreed and magically bonked all in one ritual.
It’s still debated exactly what the holy magical bonk imparted to Pebble. But some say it was an updated Aramaic-to-Greek module/implant.
The rest of his fishermen crew were all so impressed, they piled all their left-over fish-bones in his lap and asked him to translate/discern them . . . something like tea leaves, I guess.
There’s more to such rubber rumors about the Pebble. But they get even more fantastical than the above . . . so I leave you with the story to there.
Who’s to say . . . God uses some pretty strange critters and ways, sometimes.
Been practicing hard as
God’s fool
for a long time.
Great to hear I’m succeeding, by His Grace, so well.
Thanks for the encouragement.
Obviously our Lord knew Aramaic, and Peter probably did too. But I doubt seriously that normal conversations and Christ’s teaching of His Apostles took place in Aramaic. More likely in Hebrew as a rule. We do acknowledge that some words and expressions were given in Aramaic.
Greek was the major language of trade, commerce, science, technology, and education in that era throughout the eastern Roman Empire, and was understood throughout most of the western regions too, and that is why the Holy Spirit used Greek to transmit the original New Testament.
What amazes me about these discussions about God’s Words, is that God the Holy Spirit is generally given little place, and His reasoning for what took place seems to be of little account to academics in these areas. The discussions are mostly humanistic.
Preservation is a more prolific doctrine throughout Scripture than is inspiration itself. Yet the discussions about how the Scriptures came down through history are so often conducted as if the Author - God - were dead, or that he went off and hid, became disinterested in His own Words, failed to keep His own promise to preserve His Words, and left the Bible to mere humanistic academics.
So, the discussions get pretty wild and arbitrary. God, Himself, is left out of the discussion in any meaningful way.
I thoroughly agree with your significant and perceptive wisdom in this post--I believe it to be Holy Spirit fostered, wisdom:
What amazes me about these discussions about God’s Words, is that God the Holy Spirit is generally given little place, and His reasoning for what took place seems to be of little account to academics in these areas. The discussions are mostly humanistic.
Preservation is a more prolific doctrine throughout Scripture than is inspiration itself. Yet the discussions about how the Scriptures came down through history are so often conducted as if the Author - God - were dead, or that he went off and hid, became disinterested in His own Words, failed to keep His own promise to preserve His Words, and left the Bible to mere humanistic academics.
So, the discussions get pretty wild and arbitrary. God, Himself, is left out of the discussion in any meaningful way.
Great home page, BTW.
Love those forests in No. CA. Incredible. would have greatly enjoyed growing up in them.
No Big Foot sightings??? LOL.
Where do your kids serve as missionaries. Any in Taiwan or China? And for how long on the field?
If they served in Taiwan or China with the So Bap Mission Board 15 years ago, I knew their boss well.
I love the KJV and old hymns as well.
But I also know that the KJV has flaws and none of our translations are 100% accurate to the original autographs in every detail.
Truly, the "Amen" is Spiritually irresistible when praising God. We see it said that way throughout Scripture.
"Amen" is a Name of God:
To God be the glory!
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.