Posted on 02/01/2011 12:52:59 PM PST by RnMomof7
A vial containing blood drawn from Pope John Paul II shortly before he died will be installed as a relic in a Polish church soon after his beatification later this year, an official said Monday. Piotr Sionko, the spokesman for the John Paul II Center, said the vial will be encased in crystal and built into the altar of a church in the southern city of Krakow that is opening in May. The exact date of the opening is not yet known, but it should be shortly after John Paul's beatification at the Vatican on May 1........... "It was the cardinal's proposal," Sionko said. "He is of the opinion that this is the most precious relic of John Paul II and should be the focal point of the church." .........
"The idea of displaying the pope's relics has met with some reservations, even inside the Catholic Church. "The tradition of relics comes from medieval practices of teaching the Bible through images and symbols," said the Rev. Krzysztof Madel, a Jesuit priest in Nowy Sacz who has publicly questioned the usefulness of displaying John Paul's blood. "But in today's rationalized world the message should rather come through teaching about someone's life." After John Paul's death, some Polish officials said they hoped John Paul's heart would be removed from his body and returned to his homeland for burial. However, church officials dismissed any possibility of dismembering the body, saying the age had passed for that practice. Dziwisz said Friday that he has always been against dividing of the body, but that "relics have always existed and will always exist."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
This is the official teaching of the Church, from the Catechism, paragraph 169:
“Salvation comes from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the Church, she is our mother: ‘We believe the Church as the mother of our new birth, and not in the Church as if she were the author of our salvation.’ Because she is our mother, she is also our teacher in the faith.”
Sorry. The person cited a Catholic document erroneously, and I noted such.
This is what Jesus said in John 52-56:
52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
53 Jesus said to them, Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.
56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.
_______________________
Because there were so many doubters, Jesus kept repeating the fact that His real flesh was real food and must really be eaten.
Even today there are doubters who reject His words.
______________________
...the Freepers began to argue sharply among themselves, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?...
Ill ask you the question I asked in another post. When you eat the Eucharist are you eating meat or bread?
Care to cite a source?
You really don’t understand. I will pray for you.
trans = transfer
substantiation = substance
The bread and wine is changed into the Body and Blood of Christ.
Why don’t you believe the words of Jesus Christ HImself in the Bible at the Last Supper?
“This is my Body.”
“This is my Blood.”
“Do this in remembrance of me.”
Eucharistic Miracle at St. Stephen's in New Boston MI.(Catholic Caucas)
[CATHOLIC CAUCUS] EUCHARISTIC MIRACLES
[CATHOLIC CAUCUS]'Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity': The Miracle and Gift of the Most Holy Eucharist
Looking After a Eucharistic Miracle (Franciscan Recounts His Special Mission in Siena)
Eucharistic Miracle: 2009?
Possible Eucharistic Miracle in Poland
The Eucharistic Miracles(Catholic Caucus)
Vatican display exhibits eucharistic miracles
Eucharistic Miracle - Bolsena-Orvieto, Italy
Physician Tells of Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano -Verifies Authenticity of the Phenomenon
BLOOD TYPE FOUND IN ICONS IS SAME AS IN SHROUD OF TURIN AND 'LANCIANO MIRACLE'
Eucharistic Miracle: Lanciano,Italy-8th Century A.D.
Except when He says, Matthew 26:29 "I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Fathers kingdom."
And not to mention that Peter in Acts says, (Acts 10:14-16) " But Peter said, "By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean." And the voice came to him again a second time, "What God has made clean, do not call common." This happened three times, and the thing was taken up at once to heaven."
Peter had to know that what Jesus meant was symbolic. If Peter understood it to be literal blood, being an observant Jew, he NEVER would have partook of the cup. And *IF* he had thought that the cup was the literal blood of Christ, then he lied to God in Acts 10; three times.
CCC** 1376:
“The Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring: ‘Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation.’”
CCC 1413:
“By the consecration the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is brought about. Under the consecrated species of bread and wine Christ himself, living and glorious, is present in a true, real, and substantial manner: his Body and his Blood, with his soul and his divinity (cf. Council of Trent: DS 1640; 1651).”
** CCC = the official “Catechism of the Catholic Church”
Searchable at http://ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/
Jesus came to fulfill the Law.
Do Catholics really seriously believe that Jesus would have commanded His disciples to drink blood in violation fo the Law He came to fulfill?
How was He to remain the spotless Lamb of God in that case when He commanded someone to do something sinful, that would make them unclean?
Let me ask you a hypothetical question I have asked in other threads that as yet has not been answered. Were you able to travel back in time to Jerusalem on the eve of the Crucifixion, with whatever doctors, scientists and forensic tools available today to examine Jesus none of your tools or experts would be able to establish His divine nature, yet there is no doubt that Jesus was both fully man and fully God. How can you state with any certainty that that exact same divine nature is not also present in the Eucharist based upon your eyeballs only examination?
Trent speaks to intent..if the priest is busy lusting after the lady in the front role or the kid next to him on the altar.. his mind/intent is not on consecration
If Peter understood it to be literal blood, being an an observant Jew and follower of the Messiah, he would do whatever the Messiah Christ asked of him and would have partook of the cup.
And *IF* he had thought that the cup was the literal blood of the Messiah Christ, then he would not insult God by referring to the Messiah’s blood as unclean in his dialogue with the Voice in Acts 10 (and he certainly would not insult God 3 times).
In fact one can use your own citation against the position you take by noting that your comments violate the Voices admonition Do not call anything impure that God has made clean. For it was God, the Messiah Himself, who made the flesh and blood of the Last Supper clean - in fact, spotless.
What was it that Jesus called it?? Will Jesus be drinking His own blood in heaven?
I gave scripture references that Jesus said He was the “bread of life” “sent from heaven”.
I simply asked you what you believe His flesh to be. If you can’t or don’t want to answer the question just say so.
What then is the intent of the excommunicated Catholic who projects the dregs of her own dirty mind onto the motivations of all priests who ever lived?
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.