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.
Yet, after the Last Supper, the disciples remained a bunch of frightened people who didn’t understand what was going on with the crucifixion. Only after the Holy Spirit came on them at Pentecost were they transformed.
==
INDEED.
IN REMEMBERANCE . . .
hmmmm . . .
NOT
—in incorporation of me
—in transforming ingestion of me
—in integrative infusing of me
—in dynamic holy infection of me into every cell and fiber
—in miraculous transubstantiation of me
—in transforming digestion of me
—in monopolistic, market cornering ritualizing of me
No.
merely . . . IN REMEMBERANCE of me.
Jesus came to give us the truth and set us free from man-made “religious systems.”
= =
Absolute truth there! Preach it Bro.
John 6 was not given at the Last Supper. It is speaking a timeless Spiritual truth. Namely, that we must take Christ in, hunger for the living Word of God and let Him satisfy us, make Him part of ourselves - really, not just symbolically. He is our life and light.
I testify that Jesus Christ IS the Word of God. He lives. His Names are Alpha and Omega and I AM.
I realize that people who observe the Eucharist do not believe it is symbolic. And it is true that Gods presence was in the burning bush, the tabernacles and temple. Man, of course, cannot command God to do anything - but God can do anything He wills.
It would be wrong-headed to presume that God is subservient to man or that He has ipso facto transubstantiated a substance - whether a burning bush or bread and wine - simply because certain words were spoken and certain gestures were made. It is a Spiritual matter, not a physical matter.
Give us this day our daily bread. Matthew 6:11
In sum, if a Christian misses the Spiritual Truth of John 6 that we are really and truly to hunger for Jesus Christ and be filled of Him that He is not physical food and drink but Spiritual food and drink that His words are the filling, that He is speaking of spirit and not flesh - that His words are spirit and life then he will miss the treasure in John 6, all of his diligence to observe the Eucharist or the Lord’s Supper or Shabbat notwithstanding.
Or to put it another way, if one were to trust the observance - and miss the person and power of Jesus Christ Himself - it would be a great tragedy. We are to take Christ in (absorb Him, make Him part of us) really not just symbolically.
Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. 1 Corinthians 10:1-4
As Christ sustained the Hebrews in their wanderings toward their promised land, He sustains us today in our walk toward our new home in His new heaven and new earth (Revelation.) And the sustenance of eternal life is Spiritual, the words of God, not physical as was the manna (John 6.)
To God be the glory!
= =
INDEED!
No amount of luck will help when the thread is beset by those who think "respectful dialogue" is a 2x4 to the head.
There ya go, Mark.
That’s about as respectful as I can be on that score. Your call. Happy to leave the thread, if you wish.
Mockery is your best effort.
Have fun with this one:
1 Cor 10:15 I speak as to wise men: judge ye yourselves what I say. 16 The chalice of benediction which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?
imho, Salvation issues are not that ambiguous in Scripture.
Well, that certainly explains why there are upwards of 30,000 Protestant denominations.
We find no conclusive justification for the seemingly arbitrary interpretations the RC edifice makes of a number of Scriptures, including that one.
Who's "we"? "We" can't seem to agree enough to maintain the unity Christ desired for us.
You sit in judgement of the Church. This is the same Church which suffered its greatest disagreement with the East over a matter of authority, not liturgy or belief, in the 11th Century. More branches were pruned in the Reformation. Selfishness turned a "defender of the faith" into a demi-pope in England. The Church was blessed to have any number of saints, doctors and theologians along the way to help understand what Christ has built (after all, Christ said it would be Him Who did the building of His Church). And yet Quix knows better than them all? Thank you, but I'll continue my study and appreciation with the likes of Augustine, Aquinas, St Catherine, et al.
There you have it, Mark.
Personal assaultiveness on top of rather pointed thread designation violation.
Underwhelming.
In Passover, the Jews were instructed to remember the Passover at each celebration as active participants experiencing it for themselves. The Passover for the Jews was not some historical event they marked with outdoor barbeques, but a real and current event they celebrated in the present tense.
Understood that way, the way it was understood to Christ and the Apostles, makes the RC view more realistic.
You sit in judgement of the Church.
. . . .
And yet Quix knows better than them all?
= = = =
Hmmmmmm
Perhaps Mark, you need to ammend the thread designation to read:
“Respectful (except of Quix & Dr.E.) Dialogue”
I suspect we could live with it quite handily.
Plausible.
Not convincing.
Seems to me, that considering the doctrine of apostolic succession and the years gone by - that the Roman Catholic Church is both structured and large. Where is the disrespect?
.............. And it is true that Gods presence was in the burning bush, the tabernacles and temple. Man, of course, cannot command God to do anything - but God can do anything He wills.
It would be wrong-headed to presume that God is subservient to man or that He has ipso facto transubstantiated a substance - whether a burning bush or bread and wine - simply because certain words were spoken and certain gestures were made. It is a Spiritual matter, not a physical matter.
Yah'shua is the Holy Word of Elohim as John said. In order to know G-d, we must ingest the Word he has given us for our sustenance. also see: Exodus 15:2; Psalm 18:2; Psalm 27:1; Psalm 62:1; Psalm 62:2; Psalm 62:6;"Jesus" or better yet in His Hebrew Name is: YHvH is my salvation ( Yah'shua ).
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
Psalm 62:7; Psalm 118:14; Psalm 119:174; Isaiah 12:2; Isaiah 46:13;
Isaiah 49:6; Isaiah 51:5; Isaiah 56:1; Isaiah 19:20; Isaiah 43:3;
Isaiah 43:11; Isaiah 45:21; Isaiah 49:26; Isaiah 60:16; Hosea 13:4
But Christ didn’t really even put it that way.
Inferring, imputing, extrapolating . . .
is NOT the SAME thing as THUS SAYS THE LORD.
When we do that with
“upon this rock”
and end up with a very differen inference . . . then there’s all manner of . . . vigorous . . . protest.
Where is the difficulty in simply calling it the Roman Catholic Church or RCC?
In observing transubstatiaion it appears to me that it is a mocking of the Holy Spirit.. For we are talking about Jesus becoming flesh again, to be consumed by the flesh, in a fleshly way, for fleshly means.. Like the Holy Spirit(who supposedly makes this happen) comes running like a force of nature under the control of a hierophant.. Basically an elaborate play with a magical ending..
No disrespect to the RCC/EO because there are a number of rights of passage that the reformed have too that crawls my nape.. I prefer Jesus metaphor in John ch 10 that refers to Sheep Pens to explain all this to me.. There must be Sheep Pens, for the sheep pens are within us.. The "flock" metaphorically in the pasture outside(with the shepherd) the sheep pens is where any wise sheep would be but the sheep pens must have their uses.. ELSE Jesus would have condemned them, He didn't..
Transubstantiation seems to be the hinge that several other rites dangle from too.. like heirophantical control of "the layitity".. and apostle job security.. to name a couple of them..
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.