Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Eucharist: The Lord's Supper
Catholic Biblical Apologetics ^ | July 23, 2004 | Paul Flanagan and Robert Schihl

Posted on 06/10/2007 4:48:46 AM PDT by markomalley

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 301-302 next last
To: Dr. Eckleburg; markomalley

Thanks Doc. I was just turning the other cheek when I ignored this attack.

Markomalley, disagreement on doctrinal issues does not constitute a personal attack. Similarly, a personal attack does not constitute a doctrinal argument.


61 posted on 06/10/2007 2:20:13 PM PDT by pjr12345 (But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? James 2:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl; pjr12345
It is not only RC doctrine but it is also Bible-based that Jesus would build His church on the rock of Peter.

So say you. Your Church says Jesus built His Church on the rock of faith confessed by Peter. Not on the man but on his faith.

Catechism Of The Catholic Church

424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.

62 posted on 06/10/2007 2:20:44 PM PDT by OLD REGGIE (I am most likely a Biblical Unitarian? Let me be perfectly clear. I know nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ichabod1
OK, that's just blasphemy.

Not blasphemy, heresy. I am not a blasphemer; I am a heretic.

Please, let's get our labels correct!

63 posted on 06/10/2007 2:24:36 PM PDT by pjr12345 (But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? James 2:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Catholic Christians together with other historical Christian Churches (e.g., Eastern Orthodox and Byzantine Christians, Lutherans, Anglicans and some Episcopalians, etc.) believe the literal words of Jesus - that the bread and wine are truly his body and blood.

The author of the article misrepresents the Anglican understanding. Here is what the "Articles of Religion" state "Of the Lord's Supper", included in every Book of Common Prayer:

Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.

The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper, is Faith.

The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped.

With the exception of a small minority of high church Anglo-Catholics, the vast majority of Anglicans do not believe in transubstantiation.
64 posted on 06/10/2007 2:26:48 PM PDT by stripes1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OLD REGGIE; All
424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.

Well what is it then??? Is Peter the 'Rock' or is it his 'faith'??? C'mon Catholics, weigh in...

65 posted on 06/10/2007 2:27:20 PM PDT by Iscool (OK, I'm Back...Now what were your other two wishes???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Sorry, I missed this post, I had to go plant some trees.


66 posted on 06/10/2007 2:29:33 PM PDT by tiki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
Who would want to experience His crucifixion???

Whole lotta people went to Mel Gibson's movie. Meditating on His suffering is supposed to help us realize what He went through on our behalf.

67 posted on 06/10/2007 2:35:23 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
The Mass has the power to take the congregation to a different space/time, so everyone in the congregation is experiencing the original crucification.

I've theorized this concept as well. I call it the "Gene Roddenberry was a catholic" theory. What happens is that the priest opens up a worm hole in the space-time continuum. He then reaches through, grabs a hunk of flesh and fills his chalice with blood. As he retrieves these items through the worm hole, the structure of their DNA must be altered in order to stabilize them in our dimension. The miracle occurs in the fact that bread and wine are the most stable substances in which to transform flesh and blood into. All of this occurs so fast that no one in our world is the wiser.

68 posted on 06/10/2007 2:47:14 PM PDT by pjr12345 (But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? James 2:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: tiki

I hope you arranged to receive payment for planting those trees through Algore’s carbon credit company!


69 posted on 06/10/2007 2:59:20 PM PDT by pjr12345 (But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? James 2:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly; Dr. Eckleburg; P-Marlowe
No that's what they want us to think. Reseach the term in persona Christi
70 posted on 06/10/2007 3:01:23 PM PDT by 1000 silverlings (Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Ransomed
The writer of Hebrews answers your question. Any repeated offering of Christ's one-time, perfectly accomplished sacrifice contradicts God's word. As Calvin noted, to repeat the offering over and over makes a mockery of Christ's single, completed atonement for all the sins of His flock.

"Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;

Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:

But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,

This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin." -- Hebrews 10:7-18

Rejoice. We have been redeemed.

"Be not afraid. Only believe." -- Mark 5:36

71 posted on 06/10/2007 3:03:44 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly; Dr. Eckleburg; ears_to_hear; P-Marlowe; HarleyD; xzins
From one website:

http://cfpeople.org/SeminarianWritings/Sem033.html

By virtue of sacramental consecration, the ordained priest does not simply become a functionary.

This consecration does not set him apart to simply perform certain tasks in the Church. No, by virtue of the sacramental consecration which the priest receives, he is ontologically changed. He is configured to the Person of Jesus Christ, Head and Shepherd, in a new way in his very being. "The relation of the priest to Jesus Christ, and in him to his Church, is found in the very being of the priest by virtue of his sacramental consecration/anointing and in his activity, that is, in his mission and ministry." Just as at Baptism and Confirmation the Christian is sacramentally marked on the soul, so is the man who is ordained a priest marked sacramentally and configured to Christ the Priest.

72 posted on 06/10/2007 3:07:40 PM PDT by 1000 silverlings (Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: 1000 silverlings; GoLightly; Dr. Eckleburg; ears_to_hear; P-Marlowe; HarleyD; xzins

I was not aware of that the priest is also a changling. More and more evidence accumulates in support of My Star Trek theory!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1847830/posts?page=68#68


73 posted on 06/10/2007 3:11:22 PM PDT by pjr12345 (But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? James 2:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly; 1000 silverlings; ears_to_hear; P-Marlowe; pjr12345; HarleyD
The RCC is predicated on the erroneous belief that priests are actually, factually and materialistically different from other believers.

INSTITUTES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION
by John Calvin
Chapter 18
OF THE POPISH MASS.
HOW IT NOT ONLY PROFANES,
BUT ANNIHILATES THE LORD'S SUPPER.

"...Let us show, therefore as was proposed in the first place, that in the mass intolerable blasphemy and insult are offered to Christ. For he was not appointed Priest and Pontiff by the Fathers for a time merely, as priests were appointed under the Old Testament. Since their life was mortal, their priesthood could not be immortal, and hence there was need of successors, who might ever and anon be substituted in the room of the dead. But Christ being immortal, had not the least occasion to have a vicar substituted for him. Wherefore he was appointed by his Father a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek, that he might eternally exercise a permanent priesthood (Heb. 5:6,10; 7:17,21; 9:11; 10:21; Ps. 110:4; Gen. 14:18). This mystery had been typified long before in Melchizedek, whom Scripture, after once introducing as the priest of the living God, never afterwards mentions, as if he had had no end of life. In this way Christ is said to be a priest after his order.

But those who sacrifice daily must necessarily give the charge of their oblations to priests, whom they surrogate as the vicars and successors of Christ. By this subrogation they not only rob Christ of his honour, and take from him the prerogative of an eternal priesthood, but attempt to remove him from the right hand of his Father, where he cannot sit immortal without being an eternal priest..."

...We deny that they are priests in this sense, namely, that by such oblations they intercede with God for the people, that by propitiating God they make expiation for sins. Christ is the only Pontiff and Priest of the New Testament (cf. Heb. ch.9): to him all priestly offices were transferred, and in him they closed and terminated. Even had Scripture made no mention of the eternal priesthood of Christ, yet, as God, after abolishing those ancient sacrifices, appointed no new priest, the argument of the apostle remains invincible, "No man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron," (Heb. 5: 4.) How, then, can those sacrilegious men, who by their own account are murderers of Christ, dare to call themselves the priests of the living God?..."


74 posted on 06/10/2007 3:19:50 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: 1000 silverlings

Absolutely stunning.


75 posted on 06/10/2007 3:23:51 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
To a Jew who didn't really believe that Jesus was Lord, it would be a perversion of Passover.

Think about it...if a Jew didn't really believe that Jesus was Lord, why would he make the connection with Passover?

76 posted on 06/10/2007 3:37:49 PM PDT by markomalley (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus CINO-RINO GRAZIE NO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Not so fast, Sky King.

Jesus then said, "THESE WORDS are SPIRIT and they are life."

This is where folks who don't accept transubstantiation have lots of reason to take a different stand.

OK, I could see how you could take that. I don't agree. But I guess if I were to deny the obvious (at least to my little papist mind) meaning of that section and had to allegorize it, that would be a good place to start.

Sky King????? What's up with THAT?

77 posted on 06/10/2007 3:40:10 PM PDT by markomalley (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus CINO-RINO GRAZIE NO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
No, the priest is like a placemarker for Christ, but isn't actually Christ.

Thank you for correcting him/her. The expression is in persona Christi -- "in the person of Christ" -- a placemarker is an interesting way to put it...

78 posted on 06/10/2007 3:41:58 PM PDT by markomalley (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus CINO-RINO GRAZIE NO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: pjr12345
Markomalley, disagreement on doctrinal issues does not constitute a personal attack. Similarly, a personal attack does not constitute a doctrinal argument.

Then state your disagreement and have a discussion. Your attacks on my faith are just that, attacks.

As you, if you bother to read, should see, I am able to engage politely when people actually approach like they wish to have a discussion.

Screams of heresy and blasphemy (or implications thereof) are not a discussion...they are a blatant attack.

And if you're going to have that attitude, then you would do better in acting in accord with the scriptures I've pointed out to you...it would be far more Christ-like on your part.

Oh, and by the way, I haven't attacked your faith at all...and so please don't waste the bandwidth stating something about "beam in eye" or similar...

79 posted on 06/10/2007 3:46:19 PM PDT by markomalley (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus CINO-RINO GRAZIE NO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: pjr12345
I am a heretic.

Oh gee...you may have took me wrong. The scriptures I quoted were for your use against us papist heretics. I wasn't calling you a heretic. I was giving you instruction for how to deal with us Cat-o-lik Heretics. Please re-read the scriptures quoted in that light.

80 posted on 06/10/2007 3:50:00 PM PDT by markomalley (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus CINO-RINO GRAZIE NO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 301-302 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