Posted on 04/04/2015 1:59:27 PM PDT by Steelfish
The Resurrection & The Eucharist by Fr. Rodney Kissinger S.J. (Former Missouri Synod Lutheran) http://www.frksj.org/homily_ressurection_and_the_eucharist.htm There is an important connection between the Resurrection and the Eucharist. The Eucharist IS the Risen Jesus.
Therefore, the Eucharist makes the Resurrection present and active in our lives and enables us to experience the joy and the power of the Resurrection. The Resurrection is the reason for the observance of Sunday instead of the Sabbath. According to the Gospel it was early in the morning on the first day of the week that the Risen Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene.
It was also on the evening of that first day of the week that the Risen Jesus appeared to the Apostles when Thomas was not present. Then a week later, on the first day of the week, he appeared again when Thomas was present.
So the Apostles began to celebrate the first day of the week, Sunday, as the beginning of the re-creation of the world just as they had celebrated the Sabbath as the end of the creation of the world. Originally the Liturgical Year was simply fifty-two Sundays, fifty-two celebrations of the Eucharist, fifty-two celebrations of the Resurrection. Today the Eucharist is still the principal way of celebrating the Resurrection and proclaiming the Mystery of Faith: “Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again.”
As we have seen the joy and the power of the Resurrection is not found in the empty tomb or in the witness of some one else it is found only in a personal encounter with the Risen Jesus. The Eucharist, the Risen Jesus, gives us an opportunity for this personal encounter. Will all who receive the Eucharist have a personal encounter with the Risen Jesus? Yes they will. Unfortunately, not all will recognize the Risen Jesus. Mary Magdalene had a personal encounter with the Risen Jesus but did not recognize him. She thought it was the gardener. It was not until she recognized Jesus that she experienced the joy and the power of the Resurrection. The two disciples on the road to Emmaus had a personal encounter with the Risen Jesus and thought that it was a stranger. It was not until they recognized him in the “breaking of the bread” that they experienced the joy and the power of the Resurrection.
The Eucharist is also a pledge of our own resurrection. “I am the living bread come 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 Eucharist tells us that in death life is changed not ended. It is not so much life after death but life through death. Death is the door to life. This takes away the fear of death and gives us consolation at the death of a loved one.
The Eucharist also continues the two fold effect of the Resurrection which is to confirm the faith of the Apostles and to create the Christian Community. These are two sides of the same coin. To believe is to belong. Community was an integral part of the life of the first Christians. They were of one mind and one heart. When the Apostles asked the Lord to teach them how to pray, he taught them the “OUR Father.” In the Creed we say, “WE believe.” It is a personal commitment made in the community of believers.
The Eucharist also confirms the faith of the recipient and is the principle of unity and community. Without the Christian Community we lose our roots and our identity and our ability to survive in our culture which is diametrically opposed to Christ.
Through the Eucharist the Risen Jesus continues his two fold mission of proclaiming the Good News and healing the sick. Every celebration of the Eucharist proclaims the Good News and heals the sick. The Liturgy of the Word proclaims the Good News and the Liturgy of the Eucharist heals the sick. If people were healed simply by touching the hem of His garment how much more healing must come from receiving His Body and Blood?
How ridiculous it is then when people ask, “Do I have an obligation to go to Mass on Sunday?” If obligation is going to determine whether or not you go to Mass forget the obligation. You have a greater problem than that. Your problem is faith, you don’t believe. You don’t believe that the Eucharist IS the Risen Christ.
You just don’t realize the connection between the Resurrection and the Eucharist. In just a few moments we will receive the Eucharist and once again have an opportunity for a personal encounter with the Risen Jesus.
Let us ask for the faith to recognize him in the “breaking of the bread” so that we are able to say with Thomas, “My Lord and my God,” and in so doing experience the joy and the power of the Resurrection.
With 17 of them since joining the ranks of the Wonderful World of Freeperdom!
Since Jan 22, 1998
Thanks again, Jim, for this thing you have created!
Golly!
I'm 'blessed' just like Mary!
You are verga.
Thank you for taking in foster children.
I think a special blessing is in store for folks like you who have room enough in their lives for those who have gotten a poor start to their lives.
Psst...
That really means one.
“if he won’t listen to the church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector.” —Jesus
That's not even a one verse wonder to support errant doctrine. It's only part of verses.
Just so that nobody is led into error about what is being said by Jesus there.....
That verse taken out of context by you AGAIN, has been corrected many times and since it appears that it has not yet sunk in, I will post the verse IN CONTEXT again.....
This passage is not a blanket order to obey the leadership of any church which claims that it alone is the one true church.
It is at the end of a discourse addressing how to handle disputes in the body.
It lays out very specifically the steps one is to go through in resolving personal conflict within the body.
Matthew 18:15-20 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church.
And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”
NOWHERE does Jesus command us to "listen to the church".
The comment is *IF he does not listen to the church, then......*
That is a gross misinterpretation of the passage to claim or imply that it is a standing order of Jesus to listen to the Catholic church.
The clear meaning is here for everyone to see. It's dealing with disputes among believers, not absolute authority given to *the Church*.
What I find most interesting about this whole debate about sola Scriptura is that Catholics claim that the Catholic church is responsible for giving us the Bible, that they spent all kinds of time agonizing and poring over documents and fragments of Scripture, etc to determine what should be in the canon, that they WROTE the NT, yada, yada, yada.
And yet when someone wants to take it as authoritative, they blow a gasket and begin with the questions, challenges, mockery, accusations, etc.
Now why it should be an issue that someone would want to take the document that they claim their church gave the world that seriously is beyond me.
Additionally, if the Bible that they claim their church gave us is that inadequate for thoroughly preparing the believer that sacred tradition, the magisterium, the pope, etc, is necessary for the fullness of faith, just WHY should we take anything like that seriously?
I mean, really, if they were incapable of doing an adequate job in giving us the Scripture, what would lead anyone to believe that they’ve improved any? That anything else they teach or decree is of any better substance or value?
If they can’t be trusted to have doe the job properly the first time around, why should I expect them to get it right the second, or third, or how ever many times it takes?
Pete; it’s a FOOL that looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart.
—Everett McGill
I've heard some pretty horrid stories about foster families...Some are in it just for the money...
With one exception, the rough start these kids had was due to there parents. And I am sad to say that I can only count one of these kids as a "success".
One ended up pregnant at 17 by a "cousin", two ended up in jail. Three others aged out of the system and spent time in transition homes.
On the other hand all of the dogs were rescues. There was only one of those that we could not get back into being a social animal. He had to be put down after he tried to take a piece of my wife's hand.
I can't speak for other areas, but in the area but the two areas I lived in the screen process was rigorous. There was one family that did manage to slip through the cracks and were in it for the "Farm help".
The kids slept in the basement on mattresses.
That was how my wife and I got involved in Foster care. One of the kids was a student of mine and let slip about the living arrangement. My neighbor was an adoption case worker. Same agency different department.
He spoke to the supervisor and the "fit hit the shan"
Andy asked my wife and I to consider getting our certification and the rest was history.
See how playing the word games gets all tangled up? Catholics try to play the word games to try to change the meaning of what they actually do. Using images to represent God is idolatry. Using images for who you pray to is idolatry. Mary has been elevated to goddess status and is worshipped and given the attributes of God. No word nuances are going to change that truth.
Who worships the saints?
Be bold, Name names Do I worship Mary?
Does Mrs. Don-o, sitetest, salvation, steelfish, RitaOK, NYer?
Are you saying we should go back to the original meaning of the word Bible? You may recall that I showed you that it originally referred to the Phoenician port.
That one misspelling could make accidental, rational sense.
Though many children who need or could benefit from foster care have not enough there, there, as in absence of parents, more literally than figuratively...
Either way I have met parents over the years that should not be allowed to raise ferns.
One of the last kids we had was the product of incest. She had Reactive Attachment Disorder, and was not able to form normal "Social" bonds. By age three she had literally been subjected to every type of child abuse possible.
She had a tested IQ of over 136 and was one of the most amoral people I ever met outside of a penal institution.
Just insane what must go on behind closed doors.A friend of my son is a family lawyer (if that's even a proper term?) and some of the scenerios he has run briefly past me are mortifying.Things I'd never even considered re child abuse.
In the end,nothing is hid.
I tips me hat to you verga for your work with kids.God bless
Would you please answer my question?
>>In that moment, Jesus gave His mother a son; and gave His Church a mother.<<
There is nothing in scripture to support that supposition. Mary is never once described as "mother of the church". The "Jerusalem which is above is the mother of us all" is the only reference and that surely is NOT Mary.
>>This is reiterated, in a sense, at Pentecost, when the Eleven and Mary are in the Upper Room and receive the Holy Spirit.<<
Eleven and Mary?
Acts 1:13 And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James. 14 These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers. 15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)
Multiple women, Jesus brothers, the eleven, and all told one hundred and twenty people. That's the last time Mary is mentioned of or spoken about in any writing whether religious our secular until the pagan influence.
>>The mothering relationship is reiterated very strongly in Revelation 12<<
No, it is not. In no way is Revelation 12 referencing Mary. It's the nation of Israel as it was prophesied in Isaiah 66.
Isaiah 66:7 Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child. 8 Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children. 9 Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth? saith the LORD: shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy God. 10 Rejoice ye with Jerusalem, and be glad with her, all ye that love her: rejoice for joy with her, all ye that mourn for her:
It's Zion, the nation of Israel who is represented by the sign of the woman in Revelation 12 NOT Mary.
>>She, Mary, the Lady of the Sign, is the very image of the faithful Church: Lady Ecclesia.<<
So Mary is "lady ecclesia" the bride of Jesus? You can't be serious. So now Catholics have Mary as the mother of Jesus, the mother of the church which is the bride of Christ, and the bride herself?
Isaiah 66 shows it to be Zion, NOT Mary. Zion, the New Jerusalem which is the mother of us all.
Galatians 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. Catholic twisting and corruption of scripture is Satanic in origin.
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.