Replies

This is contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture

I thought that everyone agrees here that teaching of the Scripture, clear, or otherwise is nice, but not necessary for Rome.

All of the arguments you have provided are good, particularly those concerning the consumption of blood. The clean/unclean struggle that Peter "Kill and Eat" had was icing on the cake. Since Scriptures and doctrine don't matter to those enslaved to Rome, will reason work?

When Luther challenged Rome and Rome blinked, thus began the Protestant Reformation. If the Reformation was about taking people away from Christ as the sycophant cultists of Rome sincerely believe, then why did Luther keep the critical doctrines like Christ's divinity, the virgin birth, the death and resurrection and the forgiveness of sins? One would think that those would all have been perverted from the start in the same manner as all cultists and alternative religions do.

Without going through all permutations of the doctrines surrounding the Eucharist, from Rome's to the Evangelical's Zwinglian, we have the common elements, we recite the same Scripture, we observe the same LORD and same Last Supper, we largely retain the same exhortations given by Paul in how that sacrament is taken. So what is the practical difference from the standpoint of the casual observer?

The Roman version requires Rome. IOW, Rome acts as if they copyrighted and trademarked the Eucharist as if it was some movie or song, and they jealously protect their property rights with the same ferocity as ASCAP. When the Eucharist is performed anywhere outside their approved venue where they can receive their proper royalties, then the "crime" is similar to illegally downloading and burning your own copy. Once you understand their position using this template, it because quite easy to comprehend their lunacy on the topic.

To nearly everyone concerned, its crackers and fruit of the vine, this transubstantiation mumbo-jumbo is the mental gyrations that one goes through in order to brand the Eucharist into an exclusive Roman product. You can't conjure up Christ like some modern witch of Endor and make Him enter into the elements, neither can anyone who is not underneath the royalty obligations with Rome. You want a genuine, holographed and legal Eucharist, you must buy it from Rome.

Everyone understand what it really is all about now?

Here's hopefully helpful note to your point: If you read through Lumen Gentium you will find an interesting dogmatic statement to the effect that the fact of an authentic Eucharist derives from the institution of the clergy, headed by the Pope and not valid unless in communion with the Pope. What is interesting about this is that it is precisely the opposite understanding from the original. As propounded by Ignatius (c. 95 AD), the fact of a valid Eucharist was the starting point and the clergy derived their validity and necessity because their office was granted the sole authority to celebrate the giving of gifts by Christ Himself. Thus, it is not the fact of the office, but the purpose for which the office was instituted that authorizes the entire enterprise.

What ends up is therefore a division in the Church between those who hold th Eucharist supreme and venerate the bishop as being God's chosen vessel for providing it and those who hold the bishop supreme and define the Eucharist as being valid when a function of his office. The latter conception also permanently and completely empowers the clergy vis a vis the laity, who are reduced to passive participants (they get to chant some of the prayers, but don't even get a voice in deliberating as to which ones might be appropriate) while the former retains the whole Church as a unity from bishop to youngest lay person, each and all having a proper liturgy and all directed toward Christ.

All this is cf. Bp John Zizioulas.

If the Reformation was about taking people away from Christ as the sycophant cultists of Rome sincerely believe, then why did Luther keep the critical doctrines like Christ's divinity, the virgin birth, the death and resurrection and the forgiveness of sins? One would think that those would all have been perverted from the start in the same manner as all cultists and alternative religions do.

You're exactly right. That's what all cults do, attack who Christ is in essence.

It's not our faith that saves us; everyone has faith in something. That's a given. It's who or what our faith is in. If Satan can have it put in something other that THE CHRIST of the Bible, his job is easy.

If we have faith the size of a mustard seed...... the faith works, not because our faith is great but because the God we put our faith in is great.