Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/father/a5.html
1 posted on 01/05/2014 1:56:06 PM PST by Steelfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Steelfish

That link opens to a fantastic page about the Early Church.


2 posted on 01/05/2014 2:07:41 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Steelfish

It is flatly unbiblical.


3 posted on 01/05/2014 2:24:54 PM PST by sigzero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Steelfish

The Bible

The Didache

St. Clement of Rome

St. Ignatius of Antioch

St. Justin Martyr

St. Irenaeus of Lyons

St. Clement of Alexandria

St. Cyprian of Carthage

Aphraates the Persian Sage

Serapion

St. Ephraim

St. Athanasius

St. Cyril of Jerusalem

St. Hilary of Poiters

St. Basil the Great

St. Epiphanius of Salamis

St. Gregory of Nazianz

St. Gregory of Nyssa

St. John Chrysostom

St. Ambrose of Milan

Egeria

Aurelius Prudentius Clemens

St. Jerome

Apostolic Constitutions

St. Cyril of Alexandria

St. Augustine

Marcarius the Magnesian

St. Leo I

St. Caesar of Arles

St. Fulgene of Ruspe

 


5 posted on 01/05/2014 2:36:12 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Steelfish

Cannibalism is a family tradition, started by Ug in the caves.


11 posted on 01/05/2014 3:05:43 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Steelfish

There is no compelling reason to believe that Jesus was saying the bread and wine at the Last Supper became his actual blood and flesh. He also said He was the Bread of Life - is He a loaf of bread? He said “I am the Door” - is He now wood with hinges? He prayed over Jerusalem, “how I long to gather you under my wings as a hen gathers her chicks” - so now He is a chicken with feathers? Jesus was the “The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” - so now He is an actual sheep?

I see nowhere in the New Testament that the bread and the wine becomes Christ’s flesh and blood. I see plenty of symbolism in the NT that communicates God’s Truth without Jesus becoming bread, wood, a sheep, a chicken - and, I also see that the bread and wine of the Last Supper are eloquent and beautiful symbols that communicates the sacrifice of the Incarnate God in our behalf.

I know there is no way we are going to agree, but I felt compelled to try.

On the other hand, though I am very much a Baptist, I bear no animosity toward my Catholic Brothers and Sisters. We are servants of Christ, and it is to Him that we must give an account - not you to me nor me to you.


13 posted on 01/05/2014 3:13:33 PM PST by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Steelfish; Salvation; sigzero; Bulwyf; FatherofFive; daniel1212; CynicalBear; GeronL; All

“The Early Christians Believed in the Real Presence... Many Catholics and non-Catholics alike think that the Roman Catholic Church invented the doctrine of transubstantiation.”


A false equation. You’re certainly free to believe in the “Real Presence,” after all, so did the Westminster divines:

From the Westminster Longer Catechism:

Q. 170. How do they that worthily communicate in the Lord’s supper feed upon the body and blood of Christ therein?

As the body and blood of Christ are not corporally or carnally present in, with, or under the bread and wine in the Lord’s supper,[1084] and yet are spiritually present to the faith of the receiver, no less truly and really than the elements themselves are to their outward senses;[1085] so they that worthily communicate in the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, do therein feed upon the body and blood of Christ, not after a corporal and carnal, but in a spiritual manner; yet truly and really,[1086] while by faith they receive and apply unto themselves Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death.[1087]

The question is, does the scripture teach transubstantiation? Is the Real Presence the SAME THING as Transubstantiation, which our posters here claim is the case without even bothering to prove it? Well, let’s start with sacred ‘tradition’ first and then move on to scripture to test this claim:

Does Augustine believe that the “real presence” of Christ in the Eucharist is the same thing as transubstantiation? Let’s ask him:

Augustine - Against Transubstantiation

The body and blood of Christ consumed through faith without eating or drinking. Believe, saith Augustine, and thou hast eaten already.

“They said therefore unto Him, What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?” For He had said to them, “Labor not for the meat which perisheth, but for that which endureth unto eternal life.” “What shall we do?” they ask; by observing what, shall we be able to fulfill this precept? “Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on Him whom He has sent.” This is then to eat the meat, not that which perisheth, but that which endureth unto eternal life. To what purpose dost thou make ready teeth and stomach? Believe, and thou hast eaten already. (Augustine, Tractate 25)

Compare with Father John Bartunek, LC., whose interpretation requires the actual use of “teeth and stomach”:

“This was the perfect opportunity for Christ to say, “Wait a minute, what I really meant was that my body and blood will just be symbolized by bread and wine. Of course I didn’t mean that bread and wine really would become my body and blood. Don’t be foolish!” The strange thing is he doesn’t say that. He does not water down his claim, as if eating his flesh were just a metaphor for believing in his doctrine; on the contrary, he reiterates the importance of really eating his flesh and drinking his blood.”

http://rcspiritualdirection.com/blog/2012/08/15/258-eating-right-jn-652-59#ixzz2pZMDVk3c

Augustine, writing on his “rule for interpreting commands,” calls the eating of Christ to be figurative, since otherwise it compels us to do something that is unlawful.

“If the sentence is one of command, either forbidding a crime or vice, or enjoining an act of prudence or benevolence, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to enjoin a crime or vice, or to forbid an act of prudence or benevolence, it is figurative. Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, says Christ, and drink His blood, you have no life in you. John 6:53 This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share [communicandem] in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory [in memoria] of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us. Scripture says: If your enemy hungers, feed him; if he thirsts, give him drink; and this is beyond doubt a command to do a kindness. But in what follows, for in so doing you shall heap coals of fire on his head, one would think a deed of malevolence was enjoined. Do not doubt, then, that the expression is figurative; and, while it is possible to interpret it in two ways, one pointing to the doing of an injury, the other to a display of superiority, let charity on the contrary call you back to benevolence, and interpret the coals of fire as the burning groans of penitence by which a man’s pride is cured who bewails that he has been the enemy of one who came to his assistance in distress. In the same way, when our Lord says, He who loves his life shall lose it, we are not to think that He forbids the prudence with which it is a man’s duty to care for his life, but that He says in a figurative sense, Let him lose his life— that is, let him destroy and lose that perverted and unnatural use which he now makes of his life, and through which his desires are fixed on temporal things so that he gives no heed to eternal. It is written: Give to the godly man, and help not a sinner. The latter clause of this sentence seems to forbid benevolence; for it says, help not a sinner. Understand, therefore, that sinner is put figuratively for sin, so that it is his sin you are not to help.” (Augustine, Christian Doctrine, Ch. 16)

When the Eucharist is offered, it is ourselves who we receive. (Are we transubstantiated into the bread?) A spiritual lesson is to be received from it, which is the purpose of the sacrament.

“How can bread be his body? And the cup, or what the cup contains, how can it be his blood? The reason these things, brothers and sisters, are called sacraments is that in them one thing is seen, another is to be understood. What can be seen has a bodily appearance, what is to be understood provides spiritual fruit. So if it’s you that are the body of Christ and its members, it’s the mystery meaning you that has been placed on the Lord’s table; what you receive is the mystery that means you.” (Augustine, Sermon 272)

(The Catholics will often quote the first part of this sermon, but will not attempt to discuss the lesson of it.)

In fact, throughout this sermon, sacraments are tools to impart spiritual lessons. For example, the sacrament of the Holy Spirit (oil), but it is not actually the Holy Spirit:

“Then came baptism, and you were, in a manner of speaking, moistened with water in order to be shaped into bread. But it’s not yet bread without fire to bake it. So what does fire represent? That’s the chrism, the anointing. Oil, the fire-feeder, you see, is the sacrament of the Holy Spirit.” (Same as above)

Another, the sacrament of the kiss of peace:

“After that comes Peace be with you; a great sacrament, the kiss of peace. So kiss in such a way as really meaning that you love. Don’t be Judas; Judas the traitor kissed Christ with his mouth, while setting a trap for him in his heart. But perhaps somebody has unfriendly feelings toward you, and you are unable to win him round, to show him he’s wrong; you’re obliged to tolerate him. Don’t pay him back evil for evil in your heart. He hates; just you love, and you can kiss him without anxiety.” (Same as above)

Same theme, different sermon.

“I haven’t forgotten my promise. I had promised those of you who have just been baptized a sermon to explain the sacrament of the Lord’s table, which you can see right now, and which you shared in last night. You ought to know what you have received, what you are about to receive, what you ought to receive every day. That bread which you can see on the altar, sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That cup, or rather what the cup contains, sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ. It was by means of these things that the Lord Christ wished to present us with his body and blood, which he shed for our sake for the forgiveness of sins. If you receive them well, you are yourselves what you receive. You see, the apostle says, We, being many, are one loaf, one body (1 Cor 10:17). That’s how he explained the sacrament of the Lord’s table; one loaf, one body, is what we all are, many though we be.” (Augustine, Sermon 227)

The Eucharist, which symbolizes both the entire church and Christ, “not really consumed.” The Eucharist signifies an invisible reality, and is not that reality. Christians should take the spiritual lesson of unity from the Lord’s supper. Also from sermon 227.

“What you can see passes away, but the invisible reality signified does not pass away, but remains. Look, it’s received, it’s eaten, it’s consumed. Is the body of Christ consumed, is the Church of Christ consumed, are the members of Christ consumed? Perish the thought! Here they are being purified, there they will be crowned with the victor’s laurels. So what is signified will remain eternally, although the thing that signifies it seems to pass away. So receive the sacrament in such a way that you think about yourselves, that you retain unity in your hearts, that you always fix your hearts up above. Don’t let your hope be placed on earth, but in heaven. Let your faith be firm in God, let it be acceptable to God. Because what you don’t see now, but believe, you are going to see there, where you will have joy without end.” (Augustine, Ser. 227)

To believe in Christ is to eat the living bread. This cannot be so if transubstantiation is true.

“Wherefore, the Lord, about to give the Holy Spirit, said that Himself was the bread that came down from heaven, exhorting us to believe in Him. For to believe in Him is to eat the living bread. He that believes eats; he is sated invisibly, because invisibly is he born again. A babe within, a new man within. Where he is made new, there he is satisfied with food. (12) What then did the Lord answer to such murmurers? Murmur not among yourselves. As if He said, I know why you are not hungry, and do not understand nor seek after this bread. Murmur not among yourselves: no man can come unto me, except the Father that sent me draw him. Noble excellence of grace! No man comes unless drawn. There is whom He draws, and there is whom He draws not; why He draws one and draws not another, do not desire to judge, if you desire not to err.” (Augustine, Tractate 26)

The body of Christ not held by any believer, even in the sacrament. Christ is held in the heart, and not in the hand. This cannot be so if transubstantation is true.

“Let them come to the church and hear where Christ is, and take Him. They may hear it from us, they may hear it from the gospel. He was slain by their forefathers, He was buried, He rose again, He was recognized by the disciples, He ascended before their eyes into heaven, and there sitteth at the right hand of the Father; and He who was judged is yet to come as Judge of all: let them hear, and hold fast. Do they reply, How shall I take hold of the absent? how shall I stretch up my hand into heaven, and take hold of one who is sitting there? Stretch up thy faith, and thou hast got hold. Thy forefathers held by the flesh, hold thou with the heart; for the absent Christ is also present. But for His presence, we ourselves were unable to hold Him.” (Augustine, Tractate 50)

Christ must be understood spiritually, not carnally.

“It seemed unto them hard that He said, “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, ye have no life in you:” they received it foolishly, they thought of it carnally, and imagined that the Lord would cut off parts from His body, and give unto them; and they said, “This is a hard saying.” It was they who were hard, not the saying; for unless they had been hard, and not meek, they would have said unto themselves, He saith not this without reason, but there must be some latent mystery herein. They would have remained with Him, softened, not hard: and would have learnt that from Him which they who remained, when the others departed, learnt. For when twelve disciples had remained with Him, on their departure, these remaining followers suggested to Him, as if in grief for the death of the former, that they were offended by His words, and turned back. But He instructed them, and saith unto them, “It is the Spirit that quickeneth, but the flesh profiteth nothing; the words that I have spoken unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” Understand spiritually what I have said; ye are not to eat this body which ye see; nor to drink that blood which they who will crucify Me shall pour forth. I have commended unto you a certain mystery; spiritually understood, it will quicken. Although it is needful that this be visibly celebrated, yet it must be spiritually understood.” NPNF1: Vol. VIII, St. Augustin on the Psalms, Psalm 99 (98)

These things cannot be so if transubstantiation is the historical Christian interpretation.

More:

In another place, he tells us that it is weakness to interpret the sign as being what it signifies:

“To this class of spiritual persons belonged the patriarchs and the prophets, and all those among the people of Israel through whose instrumentality the Holy Spirit ministered unto us the aids and consolations of the Scriptures. But at the present time, after that the proof of our liberty has shone forth so clearly in the resurrection of our Lord, we are not oppressed with the heavy burden of attending even to those signs which we now understand, but our Lord Himself, and apostolic practice, have handed down to us a few rites in place of many, and these at once very easy to perform, most majestic in their significance, and most sacred in the observance; such, for example, as the sacrament of baptism, and the celebration of the body and blood of the Lord. And as soon as any one looks upon these observances he knows to what they refer, and so reveres them not in carnal bondage, but in spiritual freedom. Now, as to follow the letter, and to take signs for the things that are signified by them, is a mark of weakness and bondage; so to interpret signs wrongly is the result of being misled by error. He, however, who does not understand what a sign signifies, but yet knows that it is a sign, is not in bondage. And it is better even to be in bondage to unknown but useful signs than, by interpreting them wrongly, to draw the neck from under the yoke of bondage only to insert it in the coils of error.” (Augustine, Christian Doctrine, Ch. 9)

In still another place, he calls referring to the Eucharist as the “body and blood of Christ” as only a “certain manner of speaking,” the act itself obviously being non-literal:

“You know that in ordinary parlance we often say, when Easter is approaching, Tomorrow or the day after is the Lord’s Passion, although He suffered so many years ago, and His passion was endured once for all time. In like manner, on Easter Sunday, we say, This day the Lord rose from the dead, although so many years have passed since His resurrection. But no one is so foolish as to accuse us of falsehood when we use these phrases, for this reason, that we give such names to these days on the ground of a likeness between them and the days on which the events referred to actually transpired, the day being called the day of that event, although it is not the very day on which the event took place, but one corresponding to it by the revolution of the same time of the year, and the event itself being said to take place on that day, because, although it really took place long before, it is on that day sacramentally celebrated. Was not Christ once for all offered up in His own person as a sacrifice? And yet, is He not likewise offered up in the sacrament as a sacrifice, not only in the special solemnities of Easter, but also daily among our congregations; so that the man who, being questioned, answers that He is offered as a sacrifice in that ordinance, declares what is strictly true? For if sacraments had not some points of real resemblance to the things of which they are the sacraments, they would not be sacraments at all. In most cases, moreover, they do in virtue of this likeness 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, Letters 98)

Now, moving on to the scripture. If the scripture teaches transubstantiation, then we must believe that Christ ate His own flesh and blood, and will continue to do so, even in heaven. Check your chronology. It is not your friend:

1) He gives thanks, breaks the bread, declares it is His body: “And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.(1Co 11:24)

2) After “he had supped,” He offers the cup, which He calls His blood: “After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.” (1Co 11:25)

3) After calling it the blood of the covenant, with the cup still in hand, He calls it “this fruit of the vine” which He would not drink AGAIN until reunited with the Apostles in heaven, either indicating He was about to drink it, or had just drank it: “for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”
(Mat 26:28-29)

Notice also that he continues to call it “the fruit of the vine” even after it had supposedly been transformed.

Furthermore, you do not have a sacrament of “living water,” which is necessary to drink in order to possess eternal life:

Joh 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.
Joh 4:15 The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw.

If we are to suspect that Christ could never speak figuratively of Himself or of His doctrines, then we ought to wonder why we have never had actual water offered to us to give us eternal life? Obviously, the woman even took him quite literally, in the same way the Jews did in John 6. And unlike in John 6, Christ did not bother to provide any correction to her.


15 posted on 01/05/2014 3:39:41 PM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Steelfish; RichInOC; Prince of Space; JoeFromSidney; TNMountainMan; alphadog; infool7; ...

“Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died;
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 world.”
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.
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.

For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink

Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.

This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.”

These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum
Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”

Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this, he said to them, “Does this shock you?

What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?
It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.

But there are some of you who do not believe.” Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him.
And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father.”

As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him

Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?”

Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.

We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.”
Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you twelve? Yet is not one of you a devil?”

He was referring to Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot; it was he who would betray him, one of the Twelve.” [John 6: 49-71]


37 posted on 01/05/2014 6:16:22 PM PST by narses (... unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Steelfish
One of the best explanations of Matthew 26:26 I have found.

This Is My Body.

A careful reading of Matthew 15 (what defiles a man) and John 4 (Samaritan woman at the well - God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth), would also be helpful.

And BELIEVE this powerful Truth that is also applicable:

Hebrews 10:10-23 (AMP)

10 And in accordance with this will [of God], we have been made holy (consecrated and sanctified) through the offering made once for all of the body of Jesus Christ (the Anointed One).

11 Furthermore, every [human] priest stands [at his altar of service] ministering daily, offering the same sacrifices over and over again, which never are able to strip [from every side of us] the sins [that envelop us] and take them away—

12 Whereas this One [Christ], after He had offered a single sacrifice for our sins [that shall avail] for all time, sat down at the right hand of God,

13 Then to wait until His enemies should be made a stool beneath His feet.

14 For by a single offering He has forever completely cleansed and perfected those who are consecrated and made holy.

15 And also the Holy Spirit adds His testimony to us [in confirmation of this]. For having said,

16 This is the agreement (testament, covenant) that I will set up and conclude with them after those days, says the Lord: I will imprint My laws upon their hearts, and I will inscribe them on their minds (on their inmost thoughts and understanding),

17 He then goes on to say, And their sins and their lawbreaking I will remember no more.

18 Now where there is absolute remission (forgiveness and cancellation of the penalty) of these [sins and lawbreaking], there is no longer any offering made to atone for sin.

19 Therefore, brethren, since we have full freedom and confidence to enter into the [Holy of] Holies [by the power and virtue] in the blood of Jesus, 20 By this fresh (new) and living way which He initiated and dedicated and opened for us through the separating curtain (veil of the Holy of Holies), that is, through His flesh,

21 And since we have [such] a great and wonderful and noble Priest [Who rules] over the house of God,

22 Let us all come forward and draw near with true (honest and sincere) hearts in unqualified assurance and absolute conviction engendered by faith (by that leaning of the entire human personality on God in absolute trust and confidence in His power, wisdom, and goodness), having our hearts sprinkled and purified from a guilty (evil) conscience and our bodies cleansed with pure water.

23 So let us seize and hold fast and retain without wavering the hope we cherish and confess and our acknowledgement of it, for He Who promised is reliable (sure) and faithful to His word.

110 posted on 01/06/2014 1:46:37 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 1 | View Replies ]

To: Steelfish; Unam Sanctam; x_plus_one; Patton@Bastogne; Oldeconomybuyer; RightField; aposiopetic; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

178 posted on 09/13/2014 6:28:12 PM PDT by narses ( For the Son of man shall come ... and then will he render to every man according to his works.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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