Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Transubstantiation: Change We Can Believe In
Faith, Reason, and Health Blog ^ | October 19, 2011 | unknown

Posted on 10/19/2011 7:55:51 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM



TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-141 last
To: Mr. Lucky

Lutherans and Catholics/Orthodox are divided on the nature of that presence. Consubstantiation vs. transubstantiation.


101 posted on 10/20/2011 10:02:25 PM PDT by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Romulus; Theo
If you have never prayed for anyone but yourself, you’re a sorry sort of Christian.

They are followers of Calvin, not followers of Christ. Just as they would use excerpts from Paul's letters to somehow indicate their belief that Paul superseded Jesus, they use it to indicate their belief that Augustine superseded Paul and so on until it comes to their own personal interpretation -- we see this now in the latest interpretation "gay marriage and abortion are good" as pronounced by this group

102 posted on 10/20/2011 10:05:53 PM PDT by Cronos (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2787101/posts?page=58#58)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: narses; Theo; Absolutely Nobama; Elendur; it_ürür; Bockscar; Mary Kochan; Bed_Zeppelin; ...
Theo: At some point the Church heirarchy had grown so corrupt and heretical

Interesting -- it's the same logic used by Mormons for their "Great Apostasy" philosophy.

103 posted on 10/20/2011 10:07:55 PM PDT by Cronos (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2787101/posts?page=58#58)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

I’m through with your insults. Your acidic tongue brings shame to Christ. Where is the fruit of the Spirit in your life?


104 posted on 10/20/2011 10:12:59 PM PDT by Theo (May Rome decrease and Christ increase.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Theo
Acidic tongue? Talk about


105 posted on 10/20/2011 10:20:27 PM PDT by Cronos (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2787101/posts?page=58#58)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Theo
The fruit of the spirit works actively in my life, thank you -- however groups such as yours do not let the Spirit in, but try to cut Him down, just like your group excerpts the Bible and even comments!

Why can't your group read the Bible instead of relying on excerpts all the time?

As I said, all your group does is use excerpts from Paul's letters to somehow indicate it's belief that Paul superseded Jesus, that Augustine superseded Paul and so on until it comes to their own personal interpretation -- we see this now in the latest interpretation "gay marriage and abortion are good" as pronounced by this group

106 posted on 10/20/2011 10:22:22 PM PDT by Cronos (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2787101/posts?page=58#58)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Theo

And yet you ignore my civil questions, why?


107 posted on 10/20/2011 10:22:57 PM PDT by narses (what you bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and what you loose upon earth, shall be ..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Theo

Furthermore the fruit of the Spirit is so obviously absent in your group which denies Christ’s very own words. It’s sad. To your group I say, don’t go away mad — just go away.


108 posted on 10/20/2011 10:24:04 PM PDT by Cronos (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2787101/posts?page=58#58)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Theo

Where is the fruit of the Spirit in your life?


109 posted on 10/20/2011 10:33:54 PM PDT by narses (what you bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and what you loose upon earth, shall be ..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: narses

it’s amazing how so many of the “I hate em caflix” crowd can’t see their own faults. They seem to think they are perfect creatures, but that is an extension of their philosophy that they are a Brahmin, elite, elect caste.


110 posted on 10/20/2011 10:38:04 PM PDT by Cronos (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2787101/posts?page=58#58)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Theo; Cronos; narses
I see no way through this without risking some sin, whether pride, self-delusion,or some other. But I have to try to say this and to be fair about it.

Yep. Many of us feelthy papists (that's a joke, people -- unwad the underthings), myself definitely included, get pretty acerbic. There seems to be at least some of that on the other side. Here is one fault that does not respect denomination.

It is not only my shame, but a kind of general embarrassment that in discussing and examining different opinions about the Lord of Love we forget the Love part, at least I do. We leave the noble "extremism in defense of Liberty is no vice" position and end up somewhere near the self-defeating "We had to destroy the village to save it" territory. Our mutual adversary laughs.

Much as I dislike Cromwell, he did wonderfully suggest to, I believe, Scottish presbyters that they consider that they might be wrong. To strengthen his urging, he appealed to the bowels (that is, to the compassion) of Christ. I think real conversation is impossible without considering at least that reasonable people of good will might think that I am wrong, and that I must try to understand in charity how things look from their point of view.

In both Ephesians and Philippians Paul writes deservedly famous passages about the central mystery of Christ and His reconciling work. He does so in both letters to found his appeals for mutual charity and forbearance not on sentiment but on the one cornerstone.

It may be that in, as we see it, defending Christ, we forget Him and His love. To the extent that I have done so, I ask your forgiveness and prayers and hope that we can contend without bitterness but in expectation that our errors will be conquered by the Truth himself to whose saving care we ought to commend one another.

okay, that's enough grandiloquent and self-satisfied piety for one morning!

111 posted on 10/21/2011 3:12:54 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Jesus, I trust in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Theo
I’m through with your insults. Your acidic tongue brings shame to Christ. Where is the fruit of the Spirit in your life?

You nailed it...If they were indwelt with the Holy Spirit as Christians are, they wouldn't be running around an altar trying to get a bite of the Real Presence of Jesus...

112 posted on 10/21/2011 4:50:37 AM PDT by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
You nailed it...If they were indwelt with the Holy Spirit as Chr...


113 posted on 10/21/2011 4:54:42 AM PDT by Hacksaw (I don't hate Mormons. Is that okay?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

Lovely thoughts Mad Dawg.

And then came reply 112. lol

Almost two hours later. ROTFL


114 posted on 10/21/2011 5:00:30 AM PDT by Not gonna take it anymore (Member of the First Church of Christ, I am Catholic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

The difference isn’t as great as often claimed (the term “consubstantiation” is often applied to the Lutheran view, but it’s not a term Lutherans use to describe their belief; instead preferring “sacramental union”)


115 posted on 10/21/2011 7:58:02 AM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp; One Name

My thoughts exactly.

If one believes the words of Jesus and believes the Eucharist is found in the Church, then why is it difficult to accept the teachings of the Immaculate Conception, Perpetual Virginity and other such doctrines.

Some would say that I am brainwashed or not thinking for myself, but they would be wrong.

My belief in the True Presence comes straight from reading Scripture which then led me to the Church.


116 posted on 10/21/2011 8:29:59 AM PDT by Jvette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore

Psalm 120:7


117 posted on 10/21/2011 11:30:12 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Jesus, I trust in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

You nailed it. ;-D


118 posted on 10/21/2011 11:56:08 AM PDT by Not gonna take it anymore (Member of the First Church of Christ, I am Catholic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Theo

so you follow the tradition of men from the first 100 to 200 years ad?

those that know history realize it wasn’t so clear, some rejected Hebrews, James, Revelations. some accepted the epistle of clement to the corinthians and other books.

the OT canon was not established in the early first century.
some say they reject the “Apocrypha”, but the books they refer to as the Apocrypha were in the Septuigant used by the Apostles and in every Bible up until the 16th century.

again i ask you, are we left to guess on the canon or is there a way we can know for sure?


119 posted on 10/21/2011 1:04:01 PM PDT by one Lord one faith one baptism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Theo

we are all “catholic” if we hold the “catholic” faith.

if one rejects Jesus when He said “This is My Body” or believes baptism is not for the forgiveness of sins, they are not “catholic”, but heretical.

i am looking for someone to tell me who held these “non-catholic” beliefs before the 16th century?


120 posted on 10/21/2011 1:10:04 PM PDT by one Lord one faith one baptism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: one Lord one faith one baptism
I'm always amazed by people who can treat Christ's clear command regarding the partaking of his flesh and blood with such contemptuous disdain, while piously making the “born again” analogy into a sacrament.
121 posted on 10/21/2011 1:27:36 PM PDT by papertyger (Make no mistake: Sheepdogs are for keeping sheep in, not keeping wolves out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp
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.

So taking the Eucharist is both necessary and sufficient for salvation, correct?
122 posted on 10/21/2011 2:24:28 PM PDT by armydoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: armydoc

when and if you have the opportunity, yes. a newly born infant has an excuse, what’s yours?


123 posted on 10/21/2011 2:35:07 PM PDT by one Lord one faith one baptism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

Human words and terminology is insufficient to explain the mystery.


124 posted on 10/21/2011 3:33:26 PM PDT by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: rzman21

Agreed.


125 posted on 10/21/2011 3:40:57 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: one Lord one faith one baptism
when and if you have the opportunity, yes. a newly born infant has an excuse, what’s yours?

First, your answer, while consistent with a literal interpretation of this passage of Scripture, does not align with Catholic teaching. Why is that? Second, I have taken the Eucharist several hundred times. I must be good to go, right?
126 posted on 10/21/2011 4:02:17 PM PDT by armydoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
Second, I have taken the Eucharist several hundred times. I must be good to go, right?

Maybe, maybe not.

27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep.
If you're in a state of grace, you're good to "go."

I don't know what paths (if any) by which the Lord makes available sanctifying grace to those outside the Church who, after baptism, lose the state of sanctifying grace by mortal sin, so I have no idea whether you're good to go.

However, if you're not in a state of sanctifying grace, I can assure you that you are not "good to go." But only God knows the true state of your soul at present.

127 posted on 10/21/2011 4:44:14 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
It think the first thing to get clear on is that this is not a magic pill or a magic potion. Jesus was not a magician,and we don't consider the Church to be a center of magic.

We are talking about a personal encounter with Jesus. And it seems that one is free to walk away from the relationship that of which that encounter is a part.

We've all 'encountered' people who from the very beginning showed little interest in actually knowing us. Assuming that there is some benefit in knowing me, such people may have met me, but they don't receive any benefit from it.

Many of us have also met people and at first the meeting was superficial, but something drew us back to them. And we found, after a while, that knowing them, growing closer to them, meant we knew more about ourselves as well as about them. And yet people walk away even from such deeper relationships. For some, intimacy is just too much work.

It's not a good analogy. But it does stress that to eat the bread as though taking a magic pill is to miss the point. Our gracious Lord may stay with us and draw us to a deeper relationship and appreciation. We should hope he does because I suspect many of us revert to a manipulative and childish state from time to time in our life with God.

I can't delineate all the ins and outs of predestination and election, but I can say with confidence that the way in Him and to Him will sooner or later require the dropping of every thought which resembles, "Hey! I'm a frequent communicant. So where's my eternal life already?"

128 posted on 10/21/2011 5:38:13 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Jesus, I trust in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg; Dr. Brian Kopp
LOL!

"This is my body" must be taken word-for-word literal, but " 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" and "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day" die the death of a thousand qualifications. You whacky Catholics!
129 posted on 10/21/2011 7:09:10 PM PDT by armydoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Theo

Really Theo? When did this “revival” happen, how did God draw back your “remnant” and what denomination holds that “remnant” today?


130 posted on 10/21/2011 7:13:03 PM PDT by narses (what you bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and what you loose upon earth, shall be ..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
"This is my body" must be taken word-for-word literal,

I am careful with the word "literal" and am reluctant to use it.

You may eat His body and receive Him as judge only. Life will be eternal. You won't like it.

131 posted on 10/21/2011 7:30:37 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Jesus, I trust in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg
I am careful with the word "literal" and am reluctant to use it

You're open to a "non-literal" interpretation of "this is my body", then. Great!

You may eat His body and receive Him as judge only. Life will be eternal. You won't like it.

I appreciate your recognition of the gravity of this issue. My Catholic friend, you may put your trust in a ritual and your works instead of trusting in the finished work of the Savior alone, and thereby condemn yourself. You certainly won't like that.
132 posted on 10/21/2011 7:48:32 PM PDT by armydoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: armydoc; Theo
A few verse later he says,"The eater of my flesh and drinker of my blood dwells in me and I in him."

If one wants to descend into the morass of proof-texting, then one needs to think about verb tenses in Hebrew and Aramaic, and to wonder if the present tense is a present progressive (Is eating) or a kind of present perfect (has eaten) or a simple present (eats). And once that Pandora's box is opened I can find my way to a justification of just about anything.

As far as I'm concerned that demonstrates more why Sola Scriptura is a hermeneutic impossibility than anything else.

The subject is difficult two ways. One is exemplified by Theo's bland assertion that we think we're drinking corpuscles, which is nonsense as anyone who has spent half an hour with the part of the Summa that deals with this would know.

The other is the post Cartesian materialism that leads to the notion that something is what it is made of, and, similarly that an act is little more than the steps it takes to perform it.

(Oh my heavens, this is a beautiful passage!)

What is the difference between fornication and chaste intercourse? Little that one could film. Chaste intercourse takes place within the context of matrimony, and to the extent that, even in that context, it is exploitative it is not chaste. And, to be clear, true charity in marriage is not earned but a gift of grace.

so then, what is it truly to eat the true food (Βρωσις-- the KJV has "meat")? Is it only a matter of the food, so that a non-believer who ate it would eat it truly?

It is when these things are reduced to gotcha arguments and proof texts, when one reads the Bible not to encounter the speaker of the still, small voice but to justify a point of view that one encounters the chaste wife who is embraced by the exploitative husband.

The problem is that when we say "Substance" you think we mean "material". When we say "eat" you think we mean "chew and swallow," and so your side cannot articulate coherently the difference between getting laid and making love.

I'm not saying you don't know the difference. I am saying that you have abandoned the conceptual tools which would enable a coherent explanation of it and, likewise, an understanding (with or without agreement) of what we teach.

133 posted on 10/21/2011 8:06:16 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Jesus, I trust in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
you may put your trust in a ritual and your works instead of trusting in the finished work of the Savior alone, and thereby condemn yourself.

Or I may not. Did you notice my 'tag line'?

I think it's a false opposition. I often err, but I try to choose my words carefully. So I spoke of the way in Christ and to Christ. It is not that I save myself by my works. That's patently ridiculous, at least, knowing me, to me. But Jesus prepares good works for me to walk in (Paul said that) and then "walks me" through them. (Paul implied that In Philippians, IMHO.) Anybody who doesn't think the whole thing is a gift isn't paying attention.

You're open to a "non-literal" interpretation of "this is my body", then. Great!

We say it is "really" His body and blood. We do not say it is "literally" His body and blood. (D00d, I'm a Dominican. We LIVE for distinctions.) "Literally" seems to convey something but leaves all the big questions unanswered.

134 posted on 10/21/2011 8:15:48 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Jesus, I trust in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: armydoc
I have to rant a little. This PM I prayed a Rosary and then a Divine Mercy chaplet with a bunch of my homies in front of Planned Parenthood.

Anybody who thinks that I thought that I was somehow acquiring merit or impressing God or anything of that kind is NUTZ! Anybody who thinks I was conjuring God or Mary or whatever is equally deranged.

It was the “sorrowful mysteries” we were praying. We thought about our Lord's Agony, Scourging, Crowning with Thorns, Carrying His Cross, and being nailed to it and dying on it. Then we implored God to have mercy “on us and on the whole world.”

This latter is always good for me. We were being harangued by a possessed madman who, as mad people so often do, had some very sharp and well directed barbs. And as he howled at us, we were asking God to have mercy on Him, and on the poor workers and clients in the abortuary.

YOU may say “vain repetition”. We're used to it. But for us it's anything but vain. To contemplate the last, say, 21 hours of our Lord's life, and the way they tried to dehumanize him before they tortured him — in front of an abortuary? To work through the anger and horror and sorrow and ask for mercy for the people who so terribly disagree with us?

This is not a mere accomplishment — no such tawdry thing! It is an operation of grace. As I in this simple activity submitted myself to God, He scoured my heart — from the inside! Yes, I teared up. I don't consider myself special or good or full of merit. I consider God full of mercy and generosity. HIM I praise because he has done great things for me and holy is his name.The very possibility (realized or not) of merit is His gift. How could I ever think I had anything of my own? The very idea is preposterous.

135 posted on 10/21/2011 8:32:05 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Jesus, I trust in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: papertyger

You said “ “I’m always amazed by people who can treat Christ’s clear command regarding the partaking of his flesh and blood with such contemptuous disdain, while piously making the “born again” analogy into a sacrament.”

I respond thusly: I’m always amazed by people who read the words “eat the bread” and “drink the cup” and find “eat Jesus’ body” and “drink his blood”

But since many of these people drink neither the cup nor the blood in their masses, it seems a bit ironic that they believe us to have the reading comprehension issues.

“Whoever eats this bread and comes up with a tradition that claims inclusivity of both the body and blood in one species has done this in remembrance of me.”

Oh, and ‘born again’ isn’t a sacrament- it too is a metaphor

This is my body
This is my blood

This is a brain
This is a brain on religious tradition

Any questions?

Luke 11:27And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. 28But he said: Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it.

Yea, rather: Catholics may now feel free to venerate and adore me.
(Did Jesus mean what he said or not?)

Will Wallace


136 posted on 10/21/2011 10:00:01 PM PDT by will of the people
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: will of the people
(Did Jesus mean what he said or not?)

Oh I think there's no question he meant what he said. The question is whether he said what you think he said or what we think he said or something else.

137 posted on 10/22/2011 2:48:18 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Jesus, I trust in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: will of the people
I respond thusly: I’m always amazed by people who read the words “eat the bread” and “drink the cup” and find “eat Jesus’ body” and “drink his blood” But since many of these people drink neither the cup nor the blood in their masses, it seems a bit ironic that they believe us to have the reading comprehension issues.

How so? If you read "This is my body...etc" and see only "eat the bread," then you do indeed have a reading comprehension problem.

138 posted on 10/22/2011 8:38:00 AM PDT by papertyger (Make no mistake: Sheepdogs are for keeping sheep in, not keeping wolves out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: papertyger; will of the people
The legalism is also interesting. Catholics are said to be legalistic, yet we can see good reason for someone with gluten problems to participate only in the cup and for others to participate only in the bread.

Again, It makes me think of the magic -- sacrament polarity or the 'conjuring' -- 'asking and receiving' polarity.

It seems that there's a lingering thought that the spell must be wound up properly or it won't work. That,to me, seems like a parody of what we say about 'confecting' the Sacrament, rather than a portrayal of it.

139 posted on 10/22/2011 9:19:14 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Jesus, I trust in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

I don’t see how any faith that invests ultimate authority in faith and practice to a document or collection of documents can be anything BUT legalistc by its very nature.

A document has no discretion. A document can not react. A document can not clarify ambiguities. To “follow” a document requires its devotees to judge every action and attitude by how closely that action or attitude conforms to the actual dictates of that document.

That is legalism by definition.


140 posted on 10/22/2011 9:49:58 AM PDT by papertyger (Make no mistake: Sheepdogs are for keeping sheep in, not keeping wolves out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: choirboy
But he didn't hold the door and say, "This is my Body."

Did Jesus partake of His own flesh and blood?

141 posted on 10/23/2011 11:58:54 AM PDT by dartuser ("If you are ... what you were ... then you're not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-141 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