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.
While I might understand, at some level, the thousands of words the RCC uses to "explain" the differences between infallibility, inerrancy and impeccability, (concerning the Pope and, to a lesser extent, the Clergy) and the difference between the action and the person, I can find myself going in circles.
Let's just say if a policeman murders his wife, leaves her body in the house, and goes to work. During the day the policeman captures a person who had just robbed a bank and killed a teller in the process.
The policeman's action in capturing the bank robber/killer is valid while, at the same time, he is a murderer and is not fit for his office.
So please tell us about the worthiness of ministers and the nature od Donatism. They may believe it coming from you.
I am not one of "them" and they'd no sooner listen to me than to you.
The propensity of the RCC to "double-talk" and to excuse any action through an army of apologists may have something to do with a healthy skepticism among non-Catholics.
On the other hand there are pure Catholic Haters and there is nothing you can do with them but ignore their rantings as I have done with one of your Non-Protestant haters who has stalked me through several threads. Let them be non-persons to you and ignore their trash.
Personal responsibility is intact.. whether you bind yourself to someone elses binding or loose yourself from anothers loosing.. it is still individual in action..
A good post I would say.. a good subject to consider.. and will do so(further research) as you suggest..
Oththodoxy should be engaged publicly.. even here..
Was Jesus a Catholic also.
We see from the OT that the Jewish people with all of their strict hygiene laws were probably the cleanest people to ever exist and that wouldn’t be easy in the desert. They would already have clean hands when they sat down to eat, then have to do the ritual thing,(and who knows how long that went on) and maybe He was just hungry, lol
Wonderful post—totally—as usual. Thanks.
God is the only authentic, authorized, 100% pure, 100% correct authority re EXCLUSIONARY . . . particularly in matters of faith and practice.
And, one might well correctly think that given Christ’s sacrificial and horrific death in human flesh form . . . that HE, GOD HAS A VERY HIGH PRIORITY FOR BRINGING ALL WHO WOULD—INTO HIS ARMS.
Christ’s most fierce hostilities were toward the RELIGIOUS rulers who seemed to delight in stacking RELIGIOUS burdens on the serfs that they the religious rulers were unwilling to bear themselves. Those political power-mongering RELIGIOUS rulers loved to exclude and pontificate from lofty heights—particularly about the 100’s of human flesh TRADITIONS THEY had piled on top of Scripture.
Yet Christ came to implement the NEW COVENANT . . . HAVING FULFILLED and lain aside so much of the OLD COVENANT AND ITS TRADITIONS—EVEN SOME implemented by God himself.
Christ came to restore 1:1 individual ‘spiritual face’ to face RELATIONSHIP with THE FATHER.
The objective was NOT a new multi-layered stinking pile of pontificating professional RELIGIOUS power-mongering politicians dispensing yet new and endless FABRICATED, INFERRED, EXTRAPOLATED, ELABORATED, DOCTRINES AND TRADITIONS OF MEN.
CHRIST AND HIM CRUCIFIED. GOD AND GOD ALONE. All else is chaff.
Of course many beliefs are exclusive - "our way or the highway" - and thus the moniker of "club" or "pen" that hosepipe often uses. And, IMHO, it is tragic when anyone fears authority claimed by men, particularly religious men.
INDEED. Tragic and horrific it is.
Imho, it is yet another screaming example of the horrific evil in the human heart . . . deceitfully wicked, who can know it.
Just more haughty, arrogant, selfish, authoritarian demonstrations of the natural, earthy, perverse IN-GROUP vs OUT-GROUP compulsions of the unredeemed and too often even the redeemed human heart. Freud said even a religion based on love would be unloving to those not members of it. And far too many Christians have been proving the dirty old perverse goat right.
But Christ did not become enfleshed to start a religion. The religion was already there, Judaism. Therein He fulfilled the law and the prophets.
Christ came for the ANTITHESIS of RELIGION. He knew well that in the hands of the perverse human carnal heart—RELIGION would continue to DISTANCE man from THE FATHER vs bring man into intimate fellowship with The Father.
I’ve ran into folks for a decade or two who have taken “COME OUT FROM AMONGST THEM AND BE SEPARATE” to mean all must leave organized churches. I’ve considered such wild eyed pontifications somewhat off the wall.
However, recently, I’ve had to adjust my thinking somewhat. Virtually every church I’ve been a part of or visited the last 6 years plus has been more of a mockery of God’s desires, priorities and heart than a facilitator of fellowship with God’s heart.
And virtually always, the rot has centered around some aspect of pride amongst the leadership—and the priorities that pride generates vs the priorities of THE LIVING WORD.
The church I visited on Sunday . . . black pastor and family moved here from California . . . seemingly quite precious and in order on virtually all the statements I heard. Fosters church fasting water only Tuesdays and Fridays. Sweet PRESENCE of God the first part of the service.
But I probably won’t be going back. The amplified music was just below painful (most of the time it didn’t go into the pain zone) without earplugs. And the pastor spoke plenty loud enough for folks to have heard him a block and a half away WITHOUT a microphone and he was yelling into a microphone that was turned up to a good volume to begin with.
I still have a hard time seeing God all that glorified by amplifiers. Human voices singing their hearts out—yeah. But I don’t think the AMPLIFIER is more BLESSED AND ANOINTED with a setting at 10 than it is at 3.
There seems to be something about most pastors . . . . who end up loving to hear themselves talk. Wellll, I’m a prof. I can get wound up and enjoy sharing useful Godly things, too. But at some point . . . it turns into some level and flavor of idolatry of the bloke in the mirror when one has to have the volume of one’s precious golden verbal dew drops blaring out of a near maxed out amplifier. Perhaps it’s all the more so in a tiny block meeting room of maybe 30-35 feet by maybe 100 feet or so. I think this particular pastor has a heart for God and for the people. Yet, I’d guess that there’s a real hazard there even with him--watching his beloved relationship with his microphone.
This group psychology business seems to be exceedingly MORE pernicious and destructive when RELIGION is a central theme of the group. It seems like the evils of the human heart are multiplied accordingly many times over.
Rather, Christ Jesus is gathering God's adopted children, to establish a family in the new heaven and new earth (Revelation).
INDEED—WITH GOD AS HEAD—not a “loftier” class of professional RELIGIOUS POLITICAL POWER-MONGERS.
For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified together. – Romans 8:14-17 To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers. - John 10:3-5
That is the panorama of Scripture, Genesis to Revelation, and His Name Alpha and Omega:
YUP.
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence. For it pleased [the Father] that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, [I say], whether [they be] things in earth, or things in heaven.– Colossians 1:15-20
The church is His body:
Obviously no mortal authority has the power to amputate parts of the body of Christ. So the exclusionary practices of so many assemblies are meaningless except when they cause submission by fear - whether like the disciples hunkering down in a closed room for fear of the Jews or the Jews who would not confess Christ out of fear.
INDEED. And so many of the most spiritually attuned folks I know are or have been for long periods . . . OUT of any organized congregation. Seems like God has been leading the more discerning out into a place to focus ever more primarily, if not totally on just HIM.
It seems increasingly like there's something virtually inherently idolatrous about groups and group mentalities. It doesn't take long for a leader to imerge who stands on his own pride, traits, skills and priorities instead of on THE WORD cloaked in humility.
The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have [it] more abundantly. I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. - John 10:7-11
Thanks for your great exhortation. LUB
The RC’s have a much older and much longer list of
professional political pontificating RELIGIOUS power-mongers
to avoid the words of
than do the Prottys.
Though both are plenty horrific.
Hmmm, what to do, what to do . . .
Very candid and open and honest testimony.. I encourage all here to read this post #1526..
Thanks for your kind affirmation.
PRAISE GOD FOR HIS FAITHFULNESS.
LUB
The binding and loosing is a duty of the assembly.
Yet, this authority was given expressly to the Apostles...
Do a word search for "bind" and "bound" throughout the Bible and something should jump out at you... except where we're talking about physical cords or ropes, it mostly reveals oaths and damnation.
For example, you can find numerous instances where people were "bound" by their oaths or a people were "bound" by the oath of their king. Interestingly, "oath" is one translation for Sacrament (Sacramentum).
You distinguish in your post between excluding someone from the assembly and their eternal destination. However, Our Lord said that what the Apostles bound on Earth would be bound in Heaven. So if an assembly (as you noted) bound someone on Earth for their exclusion from the community, how does that then have no bearing on their heavenly reward?
I don’t think it’s occurred much at all, certainly not in anything near the same quantity.
Correct as far as it goes. There are not many "haters" of either stripe but the few make up for many.
Methinks you have a chip on your shoulder, looking for insults where none is intended.
An honest answer to what I hope was an honest question: believe (trust) the one who most closely and honestly holds to the Scripture and seeks to glorify Christ rather than self or things of the world. The age and duration of the teaching is far far less important.
Thank so much for clarifying what so many have danced around until now.
You see the revelation of Christ and His Church as having stopped 2,000 years ago. Going back to my analogy of the Church as the Bride with the Bible as a love letter from the Bridegroom... you think we have only the letters to go by anymore. There is no continuing relationship and revelation from the Bridegroom to His Bride.
To me, that suggests that we have been orphaned and all we have left of our progenitors is their memoirs. But Christ said He would not leave us orphaned. We have the Holy Spirit... does the Spirit not provide the revelation of God or is His Work subordinated to what was done 2,000 years ago?
Thats one way of "seeing" that meme...
Another way is noticing that it is all mens responsibility..
You are responsible to/for whatever you ":bind" to or "release" from, personally..
That evey "ROCK" chooses what he is bound to or is released from..
That is to say.. you cannot BLAME anything on another..
You know at the White Throne Judgement..
Like, "That is what they TAUGHT ME LORD".. as an excuse..
i.e. the catechism...
The age and duration of the teaching, paired with the unspoken number of scholars who participated in developing it, is highly relevant.
So too is the source: singular prideful authorship or the Catholic Church, which Christ Himself founded.
This authority was given expressly to the Apostles... TO BELIEVERS.
I CORINTHIANS 12-14
There are those who will say "the Holy Spirit guides me to the correct interpretation of Scripture" and yet deny that the Holy Spirit does so with the Church; and if two individuals claim the Holy Spirit guided them to their interpretation of Scripture, but the two positions are mutually exclusive, what then? One of them must be wrong.
There is nothing in Mark 16:17-18 about binding or loosing.
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.