Posted on 04/19/2016 7:13:24 AM PDT by marshmallow
A bleeding Host in Poland that “has the hallmarks of a Eucharistic miracle” has been approved for veneration.
The announcement was made by Bishop Zbigniew Kiernikowski of Legnica on Sunday, according to reports.
On Christmas Day in 2013, a consecrated Host fell to the floor, the bishop said in a statement. It was put in a container of water and red stains subsequently appeared on the Host.
After the discovery, the former Bishop of Legnica set up a commission to observe the phenomenon, the statement said.
“In February 2014, a tiny red fragment of the Host was seperated and put on a corporal. The Commission ordered to take samples in order to conduct the thorough tests by the relevant research institutes,” the statement added.
The final medical statement by the Department of Forensic Medicine found that “in the histopathological image, the fragments (of the Host) were found containing the fragmented parts of the cross striated muscle. It is most similar to the heart muscle. Tests also determined the tissue to be of human origin, and found that it bore signs of distress.”
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicherald.co.uk ...
“You infer I read the book.”
Nope. I inferred you never did. Here, again, is what I wrote: “But you said you got the quote from the original, correct? Wouldn’t that mean you read the book? Oops! I guess we see you were not telling the truth after all! Of course, that was already known.”
You did not use the original quote. You used one cut and pasted (with added ellipses and a bracketed anti-Catholic comment added to it no less) from an anti-Catholic website.
“No such claim was made.”
I did not say you made such a claim.
“Nor have you read ALL of the writings by catholic authors.”
I never claimed to, but I still knew from just looking at it that you posted a cut and pasted anti-Catholic altered passage rather than the original from O’Brien. And, of course, I was 100% correct.
“Again the primary issue you continue to dodge is catholicism claims the mass is a sacrifice of Christ to which you cannot refute.”
No, the Mass is a re-presentation of the sacrifice of Christ from Calvary in an unbloody fashion just as O’Brien says in his book and in other writings.
” That He might be with them always as their changeless Friend, their inspiring Counsellor, and their great High Priest, He instituted the sacrament of the Real Presence.”
and
“Yet Christ stood suddenly in their midst and spoke to them. In that same glorified body which transcends the properties of matter, Christ is present in the sacrament of His love.”
and
“Such then is the clear teaching of Christ concerning the Holy Eucharist-the Sacrament bringing to us His body and blood as our food and nourishment. Such is the belief of the Apostles and of all the members of the Church founded by Christ for more than nineteen hundred years.”
It’s the information age. It’s not hard to find information: http://www.ecatholic2000.com/cts/untitled-322.shtml
The simple fact is that John A. O’Brien was an excellent theologian who actually understood the Catholic faith - which does not seem to be true in your case from what you yourself have repeatedly written in this forum. He KNEW Jesus could not be sacrificed over and over again and wrote about Christ’s ONE TIME sacrifice in his books. In fact, in the book in question, through the wonders of google book previews, you can see that on page 190 he refers to Christ’s sacrifice on the cross as “the one perfect sacrifice” while talking about confession. In other words, he knows the power of confession - of absolving sins - comes from the one sacrifice 2,000 years ago but is inexhaustible in the sacrament of confession even now. The Eucharist is the same. Again, through google books, “It [meaning the Eucharist] is an unbloody renewal of the sacrifice of Calvary” (page 317). It’s the SAME sacrifice. It is NOT Jesus being sacrifice again and again and again. No one could do that if they tried. It’s the same sacrifice offered. Also, see:
http://www.themichigancatholic.org/2015/04/does-the-catholic-mass-re-sacrifice-jesus/
Even on the very page you would be quoting - if you had not merely cut and pasted from an anti-Catholic webpage instead - you find: “he [the priest] offers up again the same sacrifice of adoration and atonement which Christ offered on Calvary.”
It’s the SAME SACRIFICE and not a new one. It’s the SAME SACRIFICE offered again.
On page 304 you find this:
“The Mass is the unbloody reenactment of the sacrifice of Calvary.” It’s NOT a new sacrifice. You have been told this sort of thing before, and before, and before, and again and again, and again. Yet you “dodge” and keep making the same false claims over and over and over and over again.
“It is a contradiction of the Word. Hence your need to go Clinton.”
You’re the only one going Clinton, Hillary. You’re the only one. The book says the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you’re claiming. That fact won’t stop you, of course.
Are you literally eating flesh?
Are you literally drinking blood?
Do you understand the definition of “literally”?
Yes ctdonath2: I am saying that at Mass we, His unworthy followers, literally and unironically consume the Body and Blood of Christ.
His flesh is real food, and His blood is real drink. Obedient to His words, we eat and drink of Christ.
May God grant us all the grace to doubt no longer: but believe. Amen.
Hence my third question, which the answer to which is “no”.
You are not chewing bloody raw human meat.
Catholics already know that they're - quite literally - eating Christ's body and drinking His blood.
But God does not (usually) reveal the full glory of the Eucharist to us. He doesn't (usually) make His Body and Blood palpable and visible to us.
Why is this? God is present in the Eucharist - why does He conceal it?
The answer has to be that God does not choose to overwhelm our free will with His reality. He does not 'break the bruised reed'. His desire appears to be for us to believe in Him without receiving unmistakable evidence. 'Blessed are those who have not seen, but have yet believed'.
When we pray to Christ, Jesus does not (usually) appear in front of us.
That's not to say that it can't happen, but normally it doesn't. Christ is present when we pray, but He reserves His true majesty and presence.
In the same way: at Mass we eat and drink the Body of Christ. But Christ does not (normally) reveal His true majesty upon the altar. We already believe. And as St Paul says, we discern His body.
It is a wicked and perverse generation that asks for a sign. We have Christ's words: we don't presume to ask God to show us a miraculous sight so that we might believe.
But ask God to show you the truth of His pascal sacrifice through faith. I believe and pray that He will lead you gently to full knowledge of the Eucharist.
I have to be off for some hours. May God bless us and lead us into all truth.
Have you sold all of you possessions?
Your piece is extremely well-written, and subtle. I took it very much to heart, and I admire you for it.
I am a believer and would prefer death over denial of my faith in Jesus Christ, as revealed through the holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit in the Bible. I have witnessed a variety of miracles and have heard of many others. But I am just not into talismans and paranormalities, into which category many of the apparitions Catholics venerate, it appears to me, would fall.
Jesus wouldn’t have commanded what?
“Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.” These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.
“
John 6:53-59 NABRE
http://bible.com/463/jhn.6.53-59.NABRE
If you want to just focus on a few verses you get bad theology.
Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said to him, One thing you lack: go your way, sell whatever you have, and give to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me. Mark 10:21
Have you sold all of your possessions?
Have you plucked your eyes out as noted in Mark 9:47?
If the catholic believes in a true literal understanding of John 6:53-59 they will also do these things.
That catholics don't do this is telling.
You said Jesus would never say/command his disciples to drink His blood. Your Bible says otherwise.
End of discussion.
I see you ignored the other questions. Tells me all I need to know. You choose to believe catholic teaching over the Word.
I’m not the one who is refusing to see the Word, sir, and you haven’t admitted you were absolutely and completely wrong. Until then, we have NOTHING further to discuss.
Read John 6 in context. That is your key to understanding.
Christ sometimes speaks literally, and sometimes He uses metaphor and parables.
Was He speaking metaphorically when He commanded His disciples to eat His body and drink His blood?
No, He meant His words to be taken literally.
How do we know this? I can think of two reasons, though I don't doubt that there are others:
a) As well as speaking of His Body and Blood in Capernaum, Christ instituted the Eucharist at the Last Supper.
And He took the bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave to them, saying, "This is My body, given for you; do this in remembrance of Me."
St Paul corroborates the true nature of the Eucharist in several passages. For instance:
When we bless the cup at the Lord's Table, aren't we sharing in the blood of Christ? And when we break the bread, aren't we sharing in the body of Christ?
And also:
For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves.
b) When Christ told his disciples that they must eat His body and drink His blood, many of them left Him.
If Christ was speaking metaphorically, why did they leave Him?
If they simply misunderstood His words, then why didn't Christ call them back to explain what He really meant?
Hope this proves helpful.
Thank you very much for your kind and gracious words.
Christ told the rich young ruler to do so.
He did not chase after Him.
We do not see Christ chasing the unbelieving Pharisees either.
If Christ was speaking metaphorically, why did they leave Him?
You ask a good question but let's keep things in context.Notice He asked them several other questions.
60Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?” 61But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, “Does this cause you to stumble? 62“What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before?
63“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.
Jesus clarifies His words to them as being Spirit and life...not literal words.
Now He returns to where the conversation was before the discussion with the unbelieving Jews. It's back to believe in Him.
64“But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him.
65And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”
66As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore.
And neither did He clarify His remarks at Capernaum, after speaking about His Body and Blood.
He had already made Himself perfectly clear, and the disciples leaving Him had understood His words correctly. They left because they couldn't accept His words, not because they misunderstood them.
So, yes, we don't see Christ chasing after any of these people. He had spoken, and they had reacted. There was nothing to clarify or restate.
Those disciples knew what Jesus was offering them, and they couldn't accept His words. Just as today many readers of this thread cannot accept them.
You're not alone in this. May God give us all a deeper understanding of the Eucharist.
No, absolutely not.
Christ tells His disciples that the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life..
He does not say that they are not to be taken literally - rather, he says the opposite. He is insisting on the supreme importance and salvific power of His words.
Again - why would His disciples leave if Christ were just speaking metaphorically?
Are you claiming that the bad disciples left because they believed that Christ meant what He was saying - but that the good, faithful disciples had the grace to understand that Christ didn't mean it?
Do not turn Christ into Clinton. He said what He said, - and His disciples left in full knowledge of what He said.
I have to go offline for a few hours. God bless all here.
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.