A
azcelt
Guest
where in the bible does it say that only ordained catholic priests can turn the bread and wine into the body and blood of our savior?i,m not being a wiseacre,i,m just curious about this belief. in christian unity,celt
Are Catholics idolators? Two prominent Protestant theologians think so!
- Status
O
On_my_way
Guest
I don’t think anyone said that only Catholic Priest can turn the
Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, and nor did I.
What Belief are you curious about? Are you curious about the belief that the Catholics believe whole heartedly that the Bread and Wine becaome the Body and Blood of Christ? .
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Will you settle for one of St. John’s disciples and a close friend?
This is from St. Ignatius of Antioch, the bishop of that city and martyr. He wrote this letter about 10 years after the death of St,. John, and you can read the whole thing here.
“Let that be deemed a proper(18) Eucharist, which is[administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.”
Another passage from Chapter 7 "They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer,(7) because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death(11) in the midst of their disputes. "
Does anyone suppose that St. John might have taught this man wrong and that this man would’ve died for something false? Doesn’t make sense then does it?
Who ya gonna believe? The early church or a new wind of doctrine that only began to blow in 1517 or so??? :ehh:
Pax tecum,
M
Malachi4U
Guest
First, Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes are schismatics! They don’t even follow their own Bible when it says to be loyal so who cares what they spew out! Just read the NT and it admonishes the schisamtics routinley!
Second on the Eucharist. Scripture is clear on the Eucharist being the Body of Jesus:
St. Jn 6:54-55 “54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink”
Why else would they write these verses if the Eucharist was not the body of Christ:
1 Cor 10:16-17 “10The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.”
1 Cor 11:23-29 “23 For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, 24 and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. 28 A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.”
How could we pass judgement on ourself for eating ordinary food when Scripture is clear that no food can hurt us! Why? Because the Eucharist is not ordinary food, it IS the body of our Lord, Jesus the Christ!
Ignore the schismatic ramblings. They just pick theology easy for them to follow and pick and choose what to believe. They ignore Scripture and miss-self-interpret it so well. Why else would the ‘Holy Spirit’ guide each of them to believe so many different and contridictory things in Scripture? Because it’s not the Holy Spirit guiding them! Jesus founded a Church, His body, the Catholic Church to guide us and teach us and commanded us all to be LOYAL to Him and His Church!
While I typed this how many NEW Protestant sects do you think were founded? 2? 3? 100?
Second on the Eucharist. Scripture is clear on the Eucharist being the Body of Jesus:
St. Jn 6:54-55 “54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink”
Why else would they write these verses if the Eucharist was not the body of Christ:
1 Cor 10:16-17 “10The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.”
1 Cor 11:23-29 “23 For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, 24 and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. 28 A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.”
How could we pass judgement on ourself for eating ordinary food when Scripture is clear that no food can hurt us! Why? Because the Eucharist is not ordinary food, it IS the body of our Lord, Jesus the Christ!
Ignore the schismatic ramblings. They just pick theology easy for them to follow and pick and choose what to believe. They ignore Scripture and miss-self-interpret it so well. Why else would the ‘Holy Spirit’ guide each of them to believe so many different and contridictory things in Scripture? Because it’s not the Holy Spirit guiding them! Jesus founded a Church, His body, the Catholic Church to guide us and teach us and commanded us all to be LOYAL to Him and His Church!
While I typed this how many NEW Protestant sects do you think were founded? 2? 3? 100?
C
Catherine_S
Guest
So, 2 prominent Protestant theologians think we are idolators, huh? Well, this Catholic thinks that they are heretics.I like where I am comming from much better than where they are comming from.
** Something to Share :bible1:******Astronomer Lloyd Motz of Columbia University has written, "If the total energy contained in [any] gram of matter were released, it would be sufficient to lift a one-million-ton object six miles into the air" (*Science Digest, *February 1981). A gram is only 1/28 ounce. If the energy hidden in the bread and wine used at Mass were suddenly set free, everything around it would be blown to dust, so unimaginable is the atomic power God has hidden in these outwardly unimpressive substances.
The bread and wine used to confect the Eucharist lie on the altar so still and motionless but are they? Their electrons are whirling around their atomic nuclei trillions of times a second (1014 revolutions per second), their atoms restlessly elbow one another, their molecules dance to the melodies and discords of such forces as light and heat.
Do the altar bread and wine influence us? In more ways than one. It is a fundamental law of physics that every object in the universe reaches out in gravitational attraction to every other object. This means that while all other objects reach out toward the bread and wine, they in turn reach out in endless gravitational bonds with their influence.
**Are the man-made bread and wine ordinary things? What’s ordinary about, say, the water content of the wine? **Water tempers the world’s weather by its resistance to temperature changes, forms into clouds or explodes into steam, expands as it freezes to insulate lakes and seas, wets as water and cuts as ice, is the most universal solvent, is almost incompressible, pulls itself up against gravity by capillary action, supports weight by surface tension, in clouds floats in the air by the millions of tons, washes away mountains, is essential to life, and glorifies God by rainbows and snowflakes. “Ordinary”? **Such things are breathtaking **examples of the marvels already imparted by their Eucharistic Architect in the materials prepared for consecration: chosen additionally by his wisdom to symbolize by bread all man’s labors and by wine his celebrations.
A guard at the Louvre Museum in Paris overheard a groom say to his bride as they left the exhibit, “I really didn’t think much of it.” The guard stepped up and said, “Young man, this place is not on trial. You are.”
**In the face of such a swarm of merely natural mysteries, **the Creator of these wonders steps into our world. While on earth he showed his power over physical substance by changing water into wine at Cana (John 2:1-11) and by twice multiplying loaves and fishes (Matt. 14:14-21 and 15:32-39). First in his own person and then through the lips of those he empowered as his successors, he assures us that he has displaced all such hidden mysteries with his glorified body by the words of consecration: "This is my body. . . . This is my blood. . . . Do this! Can we doubt?
Indeed, the Eucharist is not on trial. *We *are.:bowdown:
Fr. Remi J. Payant writes from St. Paul, Minnesota.
catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9907fea5.asp
T
The_Eurasian
Guest
azcelt ------from Post #21:
But if you want to take your communion in Churches where the Consecration is not certain to be valid, you may end up adoring ordinary bread.
I had been asking in the Eastern Orthodox Forum which came later, the “Eucharistic Miracle at Lanciano where the priest was a Basilian Monk” or the “East-West Great Schism” And did God give the Eastern Orthodox Church Eucharistic Miracles after the Great Schism?.
The Eastern Orthodox posters however NEVER ANSWERED.
I googled to check just now. This I think explains why the Eastern Orthodox posters never answered this question.
THE EUCHARISTIC MIRACLE OF LANCIANO WAS IN THE 8TH CENTURY.
WHILE THE EAST-WEST GREAT SCHISM WAS IN THE 11th CENTURY IN 1054 (which is 3 centuries after Lanciano)
I am really interested to know if there were any Eastern Orthodox “Miracles of the Holy Eucharist” AFTER the Great Schism of 1054.
I am also interested to know if there are any “Miracles of the Holy Eucharist” IN ANY OF THESE PROTESTANT OR NON-CATHOLIC CHURCHES!!!
Also, I’d like to know, FROM WHAT CHURCHES WHERE EACH AND EVERYONE OF THOSE BISHOPS WHO IN UNION WITH THE ROMAN PONTIFF CONSECRATED RUSSIA TO THE IMMACULATE HEART OF MARY BEFORE THE DISINTEGRATION OF THE USSR.
What is CERTAIN is that Catholic Priests are authorized to Consecrate bread into the BODY, BLOOD, SOUL, DIVINITY of the Lord.
But if you want to take your communion in Churches where the Consecration is not certain to be valid, you may end up adoring ordinary bread.
I had been asking in the Eastern Orthodox Forum which came later, the “Eucharistic Miracle at Lanciano where the priest was a Basilian Monk” or the “East-West Great Schism” And did God give the Eastern Orthodox Church Eucharistic Miracles after the Great Schism?.
The Eastern Orthodox posters however NEVER ANSWERED.
I googled to check just now. This I think explains why the Eastern Orthodox posters never answered this question.
THE EUCHARISTIC MIRACLE OF LANCIANO WAS IN THE 8TH CENTURY.
WHILE THE EAST-WEST GREAT SCHISM WAS IN THE 11th CENTURY IN 1054 (which is 3 centuries after Lanciano)
I am really interested to know if there were any Eastern Orthodox “Miracles of the Holy Eucharist” AFTER the Great Schism of 1054.
I am also interested to know if there are any “Miracles of the Holy Eucharist” IN ANY OF THESE PROTESTANT OR NON-CATHOLIC CHURCHES!!!
Also, I’d like to know, FROM WHAT CHURCHES WHERE EACH AND EVERYONE OF THOSE BISHOPS WHO IN UNION WITH THE ROMAN PONTIFF CONSECRATED RUSSIA TO THE IMMACULATE HEART OF MARY BEFORE THE DISINTEGRATION OF THE USSR.
T
The_Eurasian
Guest
Also, although Jesus had 12 apostles, including Judas, to whom Jesus, in the Last Supper said “DO THIS IN MEMORY OF ME”,
It was ONLY AND ONLY AND ONLY TO PETER THAT JESUS SAID, “FEED MY SHEEP.”
It was ONLY AND ONLY AND ONLY TO PETER THAT JESUS SAID, “FEED MY SHEEP.”
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
S
stanley123
Guest
Gottle of Geer said:
Deut: 16,22
22 Neither shalt thou make nor set up to thyself a statue: which things the Lord thy God hateth.
V
viktor_aleksndr
Guest
in the old testament it is really forbidden to make idols or images of gods and even God because no one ever seen GOD the Father. What are they going to make if they didnt see the Father?
But the WORD became flesh. Jesus became man and many people saw Him. So i think the Early Fathers agreed that since Jesus a God became Man and many people saw Him so why not make an image like Him.
I hope you get my point.!!
But the WORD became flesh. Jesus became man and many people saw Him. So i think the Early Fathers agreed that since Jesus a God became Man and many people saw Him so why not make an image like Him.
I hope you get my point.!!
T
The_Eurasian
Guest
viktor aleksndr------Post #30:
How about, “What did Moses see when he saw THE BURNING BUSH WHICH BURNED AND BURNED AND BURNED WITHOUT BEING CONSUMED BY THE FIRE”?
U
UnworthySoul
Guest
I’ll stick with the finest theological and eschatological mind anywhere. That of Pope Benedict XVI.
R
Robert_in_SD
Guest
This is not surprising in the least. Protestants MUST reject the doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist because the alternative is facing the fact that their reformed history is rooted in the act of turning one’s back on Christ - literally. One cannot profess to be a christian while, at the same time, acknowledging that Christ is present in a Church to which you do not belong. Hence, to justify their continuance in the reformed tradition, they must rationalize their separation from the Church by denying the truth of its sacraments - chief among them the Eucharist.
I agree with CM’s statement above that, from the Bible and Tradition, support for the Real Presence far outweighs any non-C argument against the Real Presence.
Peace.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
I don’t think the two theologians named can be called “prominent” - they sound to me more like theological popularisers than theologians.
St. Thomas Aquinas is a theologian; Alexander Schmeemann is a theologian; Karl Barth is a theologian; Jaroslav Pelikan is a theologian; Karl Rahner is a theologian; Joseph Ratzinger is a theologian.Those other gentlemen, I suspect, are not. I suspect they are apologists and controversialists, but not constructive theological thinkers or builders of theological systems or outsanding exegetes.
Norman Geisler, whatever his talents may be, is not the very best that the Protestant theological tradition can offer - which is why it would be dangerous to suppose that refuting his ideas, is the same as showing that RC practice regarding the Eucharist is sufficiently vindicated once his ideas are refuted. ##
R
Ric
Guest
Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes are very correct in their observations.
I have read many of Norman Geisler’s and Ron Rhodes’ books, and their books withstands the test of Scripture.
dennisknapp:
I have read many of Norman Geisler’s and Ron Rhodes’ books, and their books withstands the test of Scripture.
D
dennisknapp
Guest
Quite the assumption, my friend…Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes are very correct in their observations.
I have read many of Norman Geisler’s and Ron Rhodes’ books, and their books withstands the test of Scripture.
Geisler and Rhodes infallible…
What do you do with passages such as Colossians 1:15 which says, “He (Christ) is the image of the invisible God”…?
Wait, God has an image which we can see and feel?
He is a man and we worship Him?
What of Exodus 20:4 which says, “You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth.”…?
God took on an image which we worship.
If you don’t like it you should look into Judaism or Islam.
Peace
W
WBB
Guest
Correction, Norman and Ron are HERETICS. There is a difference! :yup:
C
Contarini
Guest
Robert in SD:
Robert in SD:
Robert in SD:
Robert in SD:
In Christ,
Edwin
Then how come many of us don’t? How can something be a necessity when a large number of people don’t do it? Something is wrong with your theory here.
Robert in SD:
No, this is a serious misreading of the history of the Reformation. The Reformers did reject the doctrine of the Eucharistic sacrifice. They did not reject the doctrine of the Real Presence as a whole. Zwingli did; Luther emphatically did not; Calvin was in between.
Robert in SD:
This generalization is not just at variance with the facts–it’s downright laughable. For one thing, Catholics acknowledge that Christ is fully present sacramentally in the Orthodox Church, so you’re showing serious ignorance of your own Church’s teaching. Furthermore, your Church recognizes that Christ is present in some way even among us miserable Protestants. Even more to the point, as a matter of fact Protestants routinely acknowledge Christ’s presence in each other’s churches and in Catholic and Orthodox churches. I doubt that Geisler would deny Christ’s presence in Catholicism altogether. However, he is more polemical than most Protestant theologians (though considerably more moderate than diehard fundamentalists).
Robert in SD:
No, that’s simply false. I know plenty of Protestants who, like myself, have no problem acknowledging the validity of Catholic sacraments. The reason we are not in communion with Rome has nothing to do with an unwillingness to recognize your sacraments, but rather with a refusal to reject our own.
In Christ,
Edwin
D
dennisknapp
Guest
Edwin,
What is your take on Geisler’s argument or “correction?”
Peace
- Status