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.
Appears as tho the Catholics read the Scriptures intellectually...They admit that a large amount of their religion is based on Philosophy which supposedly is wisdom and knowledge...It's common for a Catholic to ask on these threads if we think 'reason and logic' are gifts from God...
But what does God have to say about this???
Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
1Co 1:20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
1Co 1:26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
1Co 1:27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
1Co 1:19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
1Co 1:22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
1Co 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
Gotta admit, most of what we say is foolishness to them...
That's easy...First, it is plainly written intellectually but is far deeper spiritually...But when you say 'plainly written', you mean when you take a verse or two out of a chapter and ignore the other salient verses...
You don't have to agree with what the Scriptures say to be a member of Jesus' body...With one exception...
That's why we are sure there are some Catholics as well as Methodists, Baptists, etc. who are in the Body of Christ, the church...
We don't have to agree on speaking in tongues, or whether there is a pre-trib Rapture or a post-trib Rapture or whether there is a Rapture at all...All we have to know is how to get saved...
I wonder what would be the Calvinist response to "how to get saved"
In any case, how would you say "how to get saved"?
thanks..
Replacing the ellipses with more RC blather would only serve to further illustrate Rome’s errors. Count yourself lucky.
ROFLMAO
Bolt an "ELECT" vanity plate to your car and you're good to go. Sin boldly!
Jesus said to Peter "Get thee behind me Satan"..
THAT PETER?... Absofreepin'uletly.. Pete didnt get the keys..
What is your Scriptural basis for asserting the second statement is relevant to the first?
Choices are not an illusion. Man make choices; they're simply always the wrong choice. We never choose to do what is right. Adam, in his perfect form had one command. He couldn't even obey that command. How much we in our fallen state can we "freely" make the choice to do what is right?
Well that’s concise. If God did not intend for man to fall, then you simply embrace Open Theism where God did not know what would happen. God didn’t know what would happen to Adam and Eve, the serpent was just roaming around the garden, and God would have to modify His design to accommondate the fall.
The post is rooted quite a few posts back upstream..
No, you're denominationalizing. It would be more appropriate to call it Christ's Universal Church.
Funny. I'm not being patronizing and yet in the same breath you do it to me. As we have both said, there is little for us to discuss so I will simply move on.
Funny. I'm not being purposefully patronizing and yet in the same breath as your protestation, you do it purposefully to me.
As we have both said, there is little for us to discuss so I will simply move on.
That is an amazing assertion! You see, as Catholics, we read the Whole Bible. You may disagree with us on its interpretation, but we certainly take the whole thing!
How can you have one Body of Christ and not have the parts of it agree on the Word Which is Him?!
Surely that wasn't your intent...?
There's no point discussing the Bible with one who doesn't even see the same plain text. Good night.
Despite the absence of any authoritative text showing that He played bingo, yes.
If this were in any way an accurate description of, "historical facts" pertaining to the Certain Marian dogmata, I could understand the animosity some have to the Catholic Church.
But it's not.
The Pope neither had nor claims to have that power.
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.