Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Transubstantiation: From Stumbling Block to Cornerstone
The Catholic Thing ^ | 1/21/11 | Francis J. Beckwith

Posted on 01/21/2011 12:26:40 PM PST by marshmallow

The Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist is a real stumbling block to some Protestants who are seriously considering Catholicism. It was for me too, until I explored the subject, historically and scripturally. What follows is a summary of my deliberations.

Catholicism holds that bread and wine literally become the body and blood of Christ when they are consecrated by the priest celebrating the Mass. Oftentimes non-Catholics get hung up on the term transubstantiation, the name for the philosophical theory that the Church maintains best accounts for the change at consecration. The Church’s explanation of transubstantiation was influenced by Aristotle’s distinction between substance and accident.

Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), like most philosophers of his time, wanted to account for how things change and yet remain the same. So, for example, a “substance” like an oak tree remains the same while undergoing “accidental” changes. It begins as an acorn and eventually develops roots, a trunk, branches, and leaves. During all these changes, the oak tree remains identical to itself. Its leaves change from green to red and brown, and eventually fall off. But these accidental changes occur while the substance of the tree remains.

On the other hand, if we chopped down the tree and turned into a desk, that would be a substantial change, since the tree would literally cease to be and its parts would be turned into something else, a desk. According to the Church, when the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ, the accidents of the bread and wine do not change, but the substance of each changes. So, it looks, tastes, feels, and smells like bread and wine, but it literally has been changed into the body and blood of Christ. That’s transubstantiation.

There are several reasons why it would be a mistake to dismiss transubstantiation simply because of the influence of Aristotle on its formulation. First, Eastern Churches in communion with the Catholic Church rarely employ this Aristotelian language, and yet the Church considers their celebration of the Eucharist perfectly valid. Second, the Catholic Church maintains that the divine liturgies celebrated in the Eastern Churches not in communion with Rome (commonly called “Eastern Orthodoxy”) are perfectly valid as well, even though the Eastern Orthodox rarely employ the term transubstantiation. Third, the belief that the bread and wine are literally transformed into Christ’s body and blood predates Aristotle’s influence on the Church’s theology by over 1000 years. For it was not until the thirteenth century, and the ascendancy of St. Thomas Aquinas’ thought, that Aristotle’s categories were employed by the Church in its account of the Eucharist. In fact, when the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) employed the language of substantial change, St. Thomas had not even been born!

It was that third point that I found so compelling and convinced me that the Catholic view of the Eucharist was correct. It did not take long for me to see that Eucharistic realism (as I like to call it) had been uncontroversially embraced deep in Christian history. This is why Protestant historian, J. N. D. Kelly, writes: “Eucharistic teaching, it should be understood at the outset, was in general unquestioningly realist, i.e., the consecrated bread and wine were taken to be, and were treated and designated as, the Savior’s body and blood.” I found it in many of the works of the Early Church Fathers, including St. Ignatius of Antioch (A.D. 110), St. Justin Martyr (A.D. 151), St. Cyprian of Carthage, (A. D. 251), First Council of Nicaea (A. D. 325), St. Cyril of Jerusalem (A. D. 350), and St. Augustine of Hippo (A. D. 411) . These are, of course, not the only Early Church writings that address the nature of the Eucharist. But they are representative.

This should, however, not surprise us, given what the Bible says about the Lord’s Supper. When Jesus celebrated the Last Supper with his disciples (Mt. 26:17-30; Mk. 14:12-25; Lk. 22:7-23), which we commemorate at Holy Communion, he referred to it as a Passover meal. He called the bread and wine his body and blood. In several places, Jesus is called the Lamb of God (John 1: 29, 36; I Peter 1:19; Rev. 5:12). Remember, when the lamb is killed for Passover, the meal participants ingest the lamb. Consequently, St. Paul’s severe warnings about partaking in Holy Communion unworthily only make sense in light of Eucharistic realism (I Cor. 10:14-22; I Cor. 11:17-34). He writes: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? . . . Whoever, therefore eats and drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.” (I Cor. 10:16; 11:27)

In light of all these passages and the fact that Jesus called himself the bread of life (John 6:41-51) and that he said that his followers must “eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood” (John 6:53), the Eucharistic realism of the Early Church, the Eastern Churches (both in and out of communion with Rome), and the pre-Reformation medieval Church (fifth to sixteenth centuries) seems almost unremarkable. So, what first appeared to be a stumbling block was transformed into a cornerstone.

Francis J. Beckwith is Professor of Philosophy and Church-State Studies at Baylor University. He tells the story of his journey from Catholicism to Protestantism and back again in his book, Return to Rome: Confessions of An Evangelical Catholic. He blogs at Return to Rome.


TOPICS: Catholic; Ministry/Outreach; Theology
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,501-1,505 next last

1 posted on 01/21/2011 12:26:42 PM PST by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marshmallow; BenKenobi

Ping!


2 posted on 01/21/2011 12:27:13 PM PST by marshmallow ("A country which kills its own children has no future" -Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Soldier

flr


3 posted on 01/21/2011 12:32:03 PM PST by Citizen Soldier ("You care far too much what is written and said about you." Axelrod to Obama 2006)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

This is one of those topics that makes no difference to living a godly life or the disposition of your eternal soul.


4 posted on 01/21/2011 12:32:22 PM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Interesting article. Thanks for posting.


5 posted on 01/21/2011 12:35:39 PM PST by al_c (http://www.blowoutcongress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Jesus is our God and Savior. We get to meet Him at His table.

That’s not profound enough? You have to tack on the ravings of a Greek heathen to make it more significant?


6 posted on 01/21/2011 12:38:40 PM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Do Catholics really know what a metaphor is?


7 posted on 01/21/2011 12:53:18 PM PST by fish hawk (reporter to old Indian: you lived here on the reservation all your life? Old Indian, "not yet".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

DManA, the ‘ravings of a Greek heathen” mentioned are in the context of trying to explain something of the Transubstantiation. The important part is the fact of what Our Lord does do. The Real Presence has been believed in the Church since the beginning, and the fact that Our Lord, Jesus Christ is truly present, body, blood, soul and divinity is most certainly profound enough for me. Please remember the line wherein the author says, “what follows is a summary of my deliberations.” He’s asking you to follow his thought process, that’s all.


8 posted on 01/21/2011 1:06:41 PM PST by sayuncledave (A cruce salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

One of the first truths I saw after I was saved, was that the teaching on transubstantiation of the church was false.

I know that many Catholics will not leave the church because they really believe that communion in a Catholic church is the actual body of Christ, that they can not get anywhere else

God freed me from that faulty tradition almost immediately after I was saved.

It is strongly my suspicion that anyone that becomes Catholic because of that teaching has never met Jesus as Savior and Lord or he would know the power of the 24/7 indwelling Christ .


9 posted on 01/21/2011 1:08:24 PM PST by RnMomof7 (Gal 4:16 asks "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
God freed me from that faulty tradition almost immediately after I was saved.

I'm glad that you were freed from those false notions embraced by the apostles. I guess they just weren't "saved" like you.

Have you written any scriptures lately? Just asking.

10 posted on 01/21/2011 1:14:21 PM PST by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk

Does this really sound like a metaphor to you:

“Amen, amen I say unto you: He that believeth in me, hath everlasting life. [48] I am the bread of life. [49] Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead. [50] This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die.

[51] I am the living bread which came down from heaven. [52] If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. [53] The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? [54] Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. [55] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

[56] For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. [57] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. [58] As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. [59] This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever.”

straight from John 6, Douay Rheims online (http://www.drbo.org/chapter/50006.htm)

Note verse 54, where He certainly could have said, I’m speaking metaphorically, if that was what He meant. Instead, what does He say? He underscores what He has just said, and repeats it. He meant exactly what He said, and we, respectfully, take it just like He said.


11 posted on 01/21/2011 1:14:27 PM PST by sayuncledave (A cruce salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
I'm glad that you were freed from those false notions embraced by the apostles. I guess they just weren't "saved" like you.

And you know that they believed it how?

12 posted on 01/21/2011 1:18:56 PM PST by RnMomof7 (Gal 4:16 asks "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Hallelujah!

And what of the numerous Eucharistic miracles which have occurred down through the centuries? The experiences of holy mystics who have lived for years on nothing but the Blessed Sacrament and the writings of numerous saints, doctors and theologians?

Fake? Worthless?

All trumped by a subjective feeling that it was just so much........pppfffffffff!!

13 posted on 01/21/2011 1:20:53 PM PST by marshmallow ("A country which kills its own children has no future" -Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk
"Do Catholics really know what a metaphor is?"

Absolutelly! We also use context to determine when it is metaphor and when it is literal. Failure to fully understand what is being said AND why we say it is the problem with most differences of doctrine.

14 posted on 01/21/2011 1:22:06 PM PST by cotton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
"It is strongly my suspicion that anyone that becomes Catholic because of that teaching has never met Jesus as Savior and Lord"

It is strongly my belief that they have met Jesus Christ above and beyond your perspective.

15 posted on 01/21/2011 1:29:29 PM PST by cotton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
And what of the numerous Eucharistic miracles which have occurred down through the centuries? The experiences of holy mystics who have lived for years on nothing but the Blessed Sacrament and the writings of numerous saints, doctors and theologians?
Fake? Worthless?

Exodus 7: 8 And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron: 9 When Pharao shall say to you, Shew signs: thou shalt say to Aaron: Take thy rod, and cast it down before Pharao, and it shall be turned into a serpent. 10 So Moses and Aaron went in unto Pharao, and did as the Lord had commanded. And Aaron took the rod before Pharao, and his servants, and it was turned into a serpent. 11 And Pharao called the wise men and the magicians: and they also by Egyptian enchantments and certain secrets did in like manner. 12 And they every one cast down their rods, and they were turned into serpents: but Aaron's rod devoured their rods. 13 And Pharao's heart was hardened, and he did not hearken to them, as the Lord had commanded.

Exd 8:5 ¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Stretch forth thine hand with thy rod over the streams, over the rivers, and over the ponds, and cause frogs to come up upon the land of Egypt. 6 And Aaron stretched out his hand over the waters of Egypt; and the frogs came up, and covered the land of Egypt. 7 And the magicians did so with their enchantments, and brought up frogs upon the land of Egypt.

Exd 8:16 ¶ And the LORD said unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Stretch out thy rod, and smite the dust of the land, that it may become lice throughout all the land of Egypt. 17 And they did so; for Aaron stretched out his hand with his rod, and smote the dust of the earth, and it became lice in man, and in beast; all the dust of the land became lice throughout all the land of Egypt. 18 And the magicians did so with their enchantments to bring forth lice, but they could not: so there were lice upon man, and upon beast.

Mat 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Rev 13:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. Rev 13:12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. 13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, 14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by [the means of] those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. 15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

16 posted on 01/21/2011 1:34:46 PM PST by RnMomof7 (Gal 4:16 asks "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

I have a vine growing near my back deck. If I cut it down, am I killing Christ again (he is the vine after all); further, if I trim its branches, am I at risk of suicide or homicide (we are the branches after all).

Taking the afternoon off to do some fishing- using medium rare T-bone as bait- (Jesus called us to be fishers of men after all).

I have a rich friend I hope to see saved- I figure the easiest way to get a camel through the eye of a needle is puree- can I borrow some blenders?

Noticed a star in the sky this morining- should I worship it (Jesus is the morningstar after all).

Met an actual Pharisee yesterday- I was walking through a graveyard and saw a whitewashed tomb.

Later I found some scribes in the snake house at the zoo.

Oh, no my right hand offends me- better call me lefty from now on.

Oops, right eye too- how ‘bout Cyclops?

Jesus said he spoke in parables so people wouldn’t understand. That’s one place he was being literal. I wonder if he realized the lack of understanding would be canonized.


17 posted on 01/21/2011 1:38:56 PM PST by will of the people
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Yes, of course. I should have known. All those miracles were performed by the devil.

You know, if you won't listen to what a Catholic has to say about the Eucharist, maybe you should talk to a Satanist. No, seriously. I'm not trying to be a smart ass.

Those who worship Satan have rituals which attempt to invert Catholic rituals. I've heard tell that those thoroughly immersed in the black arts can tell a consecrated host from an unconsecrated host. That's hearsay but what is not hearsay is that those who worship the devil despise the Eucharist. The high point (or low point) of Satanic worship is not the setting fire to Bibles or spitting on the writings of Calvin. It is the profanation of the Catholic Blessed Sacrament in the Black Mass.

That's because it is truly, Jesus Christ. Satanists recognize the Real Presence, even if some Protestants don't.

If you want to know what is holy, what is true and what is touched by the hand of God, just look at what Satan hates.

18 posted on 01/21/2011 1:56:43 PM PST by marshmallow ("A country which kills its own children has no future" -Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Eh. Another peripheral topic of Christian theology which presents a fine opportunity for Catholics and Protestants to shout “heathen!” back-and-forth at one another ... but, which, in the grand scheme, matters little.

SnakeDoc


19 posted on 01/21/2011 2:07:01 PM PST by SnakeDoctor ("They made it evident to every man [...] that human beings are many, but men are few." -- Herodotus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sayuncledave

LOL. That’s EXACTLY what a metaphor is.


20 posted on 01/21/2011 2:23:42 PM PST by fish hawk (reporter to old Indian: you lived here on the reservation all your life? Old Indian, "not yet".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: cotton; Dutchboy88

You guys are posting metaphors. If Christ was really a piece of bread, that would not be a metaphor. I don’t worship a piece of bread.


21 posted on 01/21/2011 2:26:00 PM PST by fish hawk (reporter to old Indian: you lived here on the reservation all your life? Old Indian, "not yet".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk; will of the people

You guys are dead on the money.

Otherwise, Jesus is a wooden plank with hinges and every time I turn the knob I am twisting his life? And as will of the people said, he is the growing, tangled mess by my fence and I have been hacking away at Him for years? And He is a guy herding us around a field with a big stick and a border collie? No, my FRiends...you two and several others here are absolutely correct. Jesus meant us to open our ears and listen, and open our eyes and see...if we can. But, just like the guys who thought He was being “literal” said He sounded like a barbarian, some of the FReepers here want to transubstantiate a bunch of flour & grape juice into our risen Lord. And you guys aren’t having any part of such nonsense. I’m with you.


22 posted on 01/21/2011 3:11:58 PM PST by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk

Not here. A bit of St. Paul for you, related to this:
“For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. [24] And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. [25] In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.

[26] For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. [27] Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. [28] But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. [29] For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.”
(http://www.drbo.org/chapter/53011.htm)
Why does he say this in this way? Because of the Real Presence.

Likewise, from a source much more eloquent than I:

“The Bible is the unerring word of God. Jesus Christ is the unerring Word of God.

Non-Catholic Christians who see the bread of life discourse in general, and Jesus’ words about “Eating his flesh” in particular, as purely metaphorical; symbolic language used by Christ to represent acceptance of the word of God (the Bible) and the Word of God (Jesus Christ) into our heart as nourishment for our souls, should take note of the verb used for the word “Eat” in the original Greek text.

This is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the word. The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 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.” (John 6:50-53)

In quoting Jesus Christ in verses 49 through 53 above, St. John chose to use the Greek verb phago. The lexicon at the Protestant bible study site Heartlight’s Search God’s Word defines the word phago as:
to eat
to eat (consume) a thing
When we get to verse 54 however, the author of the Fourth Gospel switches from using phago to the verb trogo. The word trogo is found five times in the Fourth Gospel and only once elsewhere in the New Testament. Trogo is used for all but once for the remainder of the bread of life discourse to describe what Jesus tells us must be done in order for us to have life within us. The same Greek lexicon referenced above defines the word trogo as:
to gnaw, crunch, chew raw vegetables or fruits (as nuts, almonds)
to eat
The Greek interlinear bible at Scripture 4 All shows the actual Greek words and the literal translation. It does a far better job at conveying the verb change from eat to chew than I can in this post. A PDF file showing the original Greek text for John 6 is available here.

Whoever eats (trogo-chews) 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 (trogo-chews) 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 (ephagon-eat, past tense) and still died, whoever eats (trogo-chews) this bread will live forever. (John 6:54-58)

While it could be argued that the verbs eat (phago) was a metaphor, simply a symbolic reference to spiritual nourishment received by consuming the word of God (bible) and accepting the Word of God (Jesus) into one’s heart, it is hard to argue the same for passages where the word chew or gnaw (trogo) are used. In quoting the Word of God, the unerring word of God seems to be pretty clear.”

(http://timhollingworth.blogspot.com/2010/08/eating-and-chewing-word-of-god-and-word.html)

There are, to be sure, metaphors in the Holy Bible. John 6, in these verses, do not contain one. I understand if you do not believe as we do. That is your choice, not mine. And I can live with that, just as you can. My task, here & now, was simply to try to explain, for your benefit, and others. By the way, sorry about being so long-winded.


23 posted on 01/21/2011 3:23:04 PM PST by sayuncledave (A cruce salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
And you know that they believed it how?

Try 1 Cor 10 & 11, especially 10:16 and 11:27. Or John 6. Or reflect on the Passover seder, where you had to eat the lamb to be spared -- eating a lamb cookie and thinking about the lamb wouldn't get the job done. Or try reading Ignatius, who learned everything he knew from Peter, Paul, and John. Or reflect on the simple historical fact that every Christian church with a verifiable history before AD 1200 believes what we do. All the Orthodox do. All the Oriental Orthodox do. All the Assyrians do.

24 posted on 01/21/2011 3:44:22 PM PST by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sayuncledave

I’m sorry for you. Christ is “in me” all the time not just at Communion. He is in you also but you have to wait til Communion time evidently before you realize it.


25 posted on 01/21/2011 3:46:49 PM PST by fish hawk (reporter to old Indian: you lived here on the reservation all your life? Old Indian, "not yet".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: sayuncledave

I write this with all sincerity...

Did the disciples start literally eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood at the end of John 6?

Did they eat his flesh and drink his blood at the Last Supper? Matthew 26 Mark 14, Luke 22

If there was no cannibalism, its a metaphor.

The New Covenant is ratified and sealed by the blood of Jesus (see the last Supper verses cited above). Jesus is glorified sitting on the throne at the right hand of God. He has given us the Holy Spirit and made us righteous by faith (Romans 5; 2 Corinthians 5:17-21). We are now children of God, new creations, a royal priesthood, joint heirs with Christ, and his ambassadors (2 Corinthians 5:17-21, 6:17-18; Galatians 4:4-6; 1 John 3:2; Revelations 1:4-6). What else could we possibly gain by consuming his PHYSICAL body and blood at this point?

The Lord’s Supper is for remembrance. To rightly discern and remember all that we have been freely given under the New Covenant. Our focus should be on the spiritual (the Word, which is Jesus and goes into our spirit), not the physical bread and wine that simply go into the stomach and out into the sewer. (Matthew 15:1-20; Mark 7:1-23)

Jesus died once for all time. See Hebrews 10:11-18. Assuming transubstantion were true, you would be sacrificing Christ again and again as under the old covenant, which is not scriptural. Jesus is in heaven waiting until his enemies are humbled and made a footstool under his feet. He is not physically returning to earth every Sunday in a shot glass and a piece of bread.

If you are born again, you have something even better, Jesus lives in you through the Holy Spirit. You want Jesus in your heart (spirit), not your stomach.


26 posted on 01/21/2011 3:53:22 PM PST by Kandy Atz ("Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want for bread.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Kandy Atz
Kudos for such clear exposition. May I add that Jesus was confirming for His disciples that He is the Priest Forever after the order of Melchizedek for He tells them He is the bread and His blood is the wine which was brought to Abraham. Because we have this Great High Priest forever, we do not need to crucify anew The Lord from Heaven, we have our nature nailed with Him on His cross and are confrimed by His resurrection, so we need not actually repeat that reality daily, He has done it once forever and entered into the Holy of Holies. Jesus Himself told the disciples 'do this in remembrance of Me'.
27 posted on 01/21/2011 4:01:54 PM PST by MHGinTN (Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sayuncledave

Well, you are half right. You are quoting the Bible %100. The problem is you are interpreting wrong.


28 posted on 01/21/2011 4:10:19 PM PST by fish hawk (reporter to old Indian: you lived here on the reservation all your life? Old Indian, "not yet".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Kandy Atz

Dear Kandy Atz,
the Church does not take it as a metaphor. That was what fish hawk was disputing. I’ve been rather long-winded here tonight, so here is the single best explanation I can think of, for you. This is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church at the Vatican, and is, for me as a Catholic, the final word.

(http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm)

I believe it as surely as I know my name, and as surely as I respect your opinion, which apparently disagrees with my belief. You might reread my statements, which are scriptural, given that they are direct quotes from the Holy Bible. It is my sincere hope that you will take a moment to follow the link and see for yourself, exactly what we believe. I will add that we who are Catholics are born anew in water and spirit, when we are baptized, but that’s a subject for another day. I wish you well on your journey, and will simply say, God bless, and Good night.


29 posted on 01/21/2011 4:28:46 PM PST by sayuncledave (A cruce salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

I guess the author could be called a “failed Protestant”.


30 posted on 01/21/2011 5:09:32 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk; RnMomof7
Do Catholics really know what a metaphor is?

They HAVE to because they really do must see that what they put into their mouths at Mass is not literal human flesh and blood. They use words like "accident" and "transubstantiation" to describe a substance that still never physically changes yet spiritually does to their minds.

Personally, it doesn't matter to me if Catholics or others want to think of the bread of communion in this way. What I stridently disagree with is the dogma that goes along with it that curses with eternal hell all who do NOT believe as they do and that insists that when we receive Christ by grace through faith it is not enough and anyone who claims to be a Christian MUST receive the "Eucharist" in order to obtain "grace". Eucharist meant thanksgiving in the early church and they came together to share in a love feast and when they took the bread and wine and passed it around they were doing it in remembrance of Christ's sacrifice for them. This is what Jesus actually said to do at that last supper with his disciples.

31 posted on 01/21/2011 5:27:24 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Ah....but Jesus HIMSELF, said to “Take this Bread and eat it, this is MY BODY”....etc.....so don’t follow Jesus’s own words at your peril.


32 posted on 01/21/2011 5:52:22 PM PST by Ann Archy (Abortion......the Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk

Jesus spoke in Parables....NOT metaphors......not EVER metaphors.


33 posted on 01/21/2011 5:53:23 PM PST by Ann Archy (Abortion......the Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Oh geesh, not this again. Please....go about your Protestant religion and we will NOT say anything about what you believe in, but leave Catholics and what we believe alone...PLEASE....go take care of your 7 children which GOD has Blessed you with.


34 posted on 01/21/2011 5:55:57 PM PST by Ann Archy (Abortion......the Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

AMEN...AMEN...AMEN!!!!


35 posted on 01/21/2011 5:57:57 PM PST by Ann Archy (Abortion......the Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy
So “living Waters” “ Israel the fig tree” “I am the vine” “Knock and it shall be opened” “ I am the Shepard, you are the sheep”, and on and on are not metaphors. Do you have a dictionary at your house. You are getting really close to asinine here.
36 posted on 01/21/2011 6:21:32 PM PST by fish hawk (reporter to old Indian: you lived here on the reservation all your life? Old Indian, "not yet".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: sayuncledave
Do those who partake of the Eucharist die? Do their bodies die? ... It is their spirit which is 'fed' with the body and blood of Jesus The Christ. Did the hebrews eating manna in the desert die? Jesus was making his point thatthere is a profound difference in the body and the spirit. Jesus offers His body and blood as Spiritual food, not literal cannibalism. He told His disciples to take and eat the bread and drink the wine in REMEMBRANCE of Him, not to digest His flesh and blood. Now if God has a spiritual way to transmogrify the wheat product and the grape product into SPIRITUAL substance, then God does that. But a man with a special robe, bland wafers, and a pretty gobblet with derivative from grapes doesn't do it. The love feast was practiced in homes of believers before there was even a Catholic Church of Priests and Churches. The Eucharistic feast is a catholic remembrance of Jesus sacrificing His body and blood for our Atonement.
37 posted on 01/21/2011 6:26:56 PM PST by MHGinTN (Some, believing they can't be deceived, it's nigh impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy; RnMomof7; marsh-mellow
Oh geesh, not this again. Please....go about your Protestant religion and we will NOT say anything about what you believe in, but leave Catholics and what we believe alone...PLEASE....go take care of your 7 children which GOD has Blessed you with.

You need to take your disgust about non-Catholics posting their opinions on an OPEN religion forum topic out on the person who chose to post it that way. Just so you understand, when one does it this way, they are inviting opposing views. Perhaps you need to stay on the Caucus threads to be more comfortable.

38 posted on 01/21/2011 6:28:20 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
FYI.

Oh geesh, not this again. Please....go about your Protestant religion and we will NOT say anything about what you believe in, but leave Catholics and what we believe alone...PLEASE....go take care of your 7 children which GOD has Blessed you with.

You need to take your disgust about non-Catholics posting their opinions on an OPEN religion forum topic out on the person who chose to post it that way. Just so you understand, when one does it this way, they are inviting opposing views. Perhaps you need to stay on the Caucus threads to be more comfortable.

39 posted on 01/21/2011 6:29:32 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

The legalism of the RCC astounds me.


40 posted on 01/21/2011 8:31:16 PM PST by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Beckwith bump!


41 posted on 01/21/2011 8:35:27 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk

No metaphor in use here at all.

Trans=transfer
Substantiation=substance

The Bread is transferred into the Body of Christ, just as the Lord said at the Last Supper. “This is my Body.”

The Wine is transferred into the actual Blood of Christ, just as Christ said at the Last Supper, “Take and drink, this is my Blood, the Blood of the New Covenant.”

It is at your own peril that you do not take this Scripture literally.


42 posted on 01/21/2011 8:39:21 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
You really do need to educate yourself on Eucharistic Miracles!

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.

43 posted on 01/21/2011 8:41:29 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk

Sorry, Catholics don’t do YOPIOS.


44 posted on 01/21/2011 8:43:55 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk

No, they are not metaphors. They are allegories.


45 posted on 01/21/2011 8:45:16 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: All; marshmallow

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/the_eucharist.html


46 posted on 01/21/2011 9:34:45 PM PST by johngrace (God so loved the world so he gave his only son! Praise Jesus and Hail Mary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy

If I believe this:

Jesus is our God and Savior. We get to meet Him at His table.

Am I in peril?


47 posted on 01/22/2011 1:50:23 AM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow; DManA; RnMomof7; Dutchboy88
Built on the Wrong Foundation

Francis Beckwith explains (in a blog entry / column titled: "Transubstantiation: From Stumbling Block to Cornerstone"):

The Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist is a real stumbling block to some Protestants who are seriously considering Catholicism. It was for me too, until I explored the subject, historically and scripturally.
Transubstantiation is one of those Roman dogmas that spectacularly fails the tests of history and Scripture, so it was interesting to read what Beckwith wrote. It was particularly interesting because Beckwith views transubstantiation as a cornerstone, whereas for us (Reformed), the cornerstone of our theology is the Word of God.

Beckwith begins by allegedly setting for the doctrine of transubstantiation:

Catholicism holds that bread and wine literally become the body and blood of Christ when they are consecrated by the priest celebrating the Mass. Oftentimes non-Catholics get hung up on the term transubstantiation, the name for the philosophical theory that the Church maintains best accounts for the change at consecration.
There's a tiny problem that Beckwith hasn't accurately represented his church's position. The position of Rome is that:
And this faith has ever been in the Church of God, that, immediately after the consecration, the veritable Body of our Lord, and His veritable Blood, together with His soul and divinity, are under the species of bread and wine; but the Body indeed under the species of bread, and the Blood under the species of wine, by the force of the words; but the body itself under the species of wine, and the blood under the species of bread, and the soul under both, by the force of that natural connexion and concomitancy whereby the parts of Christ our Lord, who hath now risen from the dead, to die no more, are united together; and the divinity, furthermore, on account of the admirable hypostatical union thereof with His body and soul. Wherefore it is most true, that as much is contained under either species as under both; for Christ whole and entire is under the species of bread, and under any part whatsoever of that species; likewise the whole (Christ) is under the species of wine, and under the parts thereof.

And because that Christ, our Redeemer, declared that which He offered under the species of bread to be truly His own body, therefore has it ever been a firm belief in the Church of God, and this holy Synod doth now declare it anew, that, by the consecration of the bread and of the wine, a conversion is made 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; which conversion is, by the holy Catholic Church, suitably and properly called Transubstantiation.

- Trent, Session XIII, Chapters 3-4

Notice what is actually involved:

1) The bread becomes not just the body of Christ, but the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ, and no longer remains bread.

2) The wine becomes not just the blood of Christ, but the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ, and no longer remains wine.

So, while there may be some vague "Eucharistic realism" out there in the fathers, that does not convert Jesus' metaphors into the Tridentine absurdity, in which the bread is said to be not only the body of the Lord, but his blood, soul, and divinity as well - and not at all to be bread, except as to appearances. Had Beckwith founded himself on the Word of God, rather than on the traditions of men, he would not be led into this error. Since he has rejected, however, the Word of God, he has a new cornerstone for himself.

48 posted on 01/22/2011 9:18:11 AM PST by topcat54 ("Dispensationalism -- an error of Biblical proportions.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

Amen. Excellent points. Insofar as the RCC believes itself to be the curators of the Word of God, they seem to be able to ignore it whenever it suits their fancy.


49 posted on 01/22/2011 9:58:58 AM PST by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Yes, of course. I should have known. All those miracles were performed by the devil.

Deception is the desire of Satan, he wants to have men take their eyes off of God and put it objects and actions..

I know what Catholics say about the eucharist, and I know it is not true, but a deception.

Those who worship Satan have rituals which attempt to invert Catholic rituals

Exactly ,They mimic the work of God.. and that is exactly what is done with the eucharist.. that have made the last passover meal into a false god, a false ritual that replaces the meaning that Christ intended..

Lets look at this ok?

If we go to John 5-6 we see Jesus on route to celebrate the passover in Jerusalem . As He travels He is attracting crowds that He is teaching ... He sees they are physically hungry and He feeds them with a few fish and loaves of bread .

After that miracle the crowds continued to follow Him. But they were not following Him because they were looking for a Savior, they followed Him to be fed by another miracle .

At this point Jesus rebukes them and He draws a Passover reference for them (remember that is where He was going ) He told them that Moses and the bread were a "type" pointing to Him.. The Israelites were fed manna in the desert as they followed Moses, that fed them physically.. But the He is the bread that will give men eternal life that the Father has sent .

We see that the unleavened bread of the Passover meal, that was done as a memorial of the salvation of the Jewish people in the desert , is a sign..a prophetic meal pointing to Christ.

Now move to the final passover meal..it is final because the prophesy is fulfilled shortly after it

Jesus holds up the bread...the remembrance of the manna in the desert and reveals the prophetic nature of it..He says THIS is my body ...

He then tells them to now do this in memory of HIM no longer the passover. The passover is fulfilled

The Lord did not hesitate to say: “This is My Body”, when He wanted to give a sign of His body” (Augustine, Against Adimant). He [Christ] committed and delivered to His disciples the figure of His Body and Blood” (Augustine, on Psalm 3). [The sacraments] bear the names of the realities which they resemble. As, therefore, in a certain manner the sacrament of Christ's body is Christ's body, and the sacrament of Christ's blood is Christ's blood” (Augustine, Letter 98, From Augustine to Boniface).

50 posted on 01/22/2011 10:09:42 AM PST by RnMomof7 (Gal 4:16 asks "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,501-1,505 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson