At Last Supper, did Jesus hold himself in His hands?

[johnshelby]

Stephen T:

This is an interesting thread. I know that the Church teaches of a phenomena called bilocation. That is when a person can be in two different places at the same exact time. Numerous saints were given this power–one saint even held a mass and heard confessions at the same time! I wonder if this is similar to what happened at the Last Supper? Thoughts?

Pax tecum

~Stephen

Jesus wasn’t, and isn’t a man, He could be anywhere and
everywhere at the same time…

this is another case of trying to put human rules on God…

you have to forget our limitations… God is limitless…

I Am… it’s still His name… He is… always… everywhere…

 

[johnshelby]

this is a very interesting thread…

but, i have to go… i’m headed to church… lol

peace to all, and God bless…

 

[epr1993]

Tibbar:

Good one! Cuts right to the point on the matter of the Lord’s supper. Hyperbole, sheer hyperbole.

Hyperbole has a respected place in teaching. Don’t make the mistake of expecting every word Jesus says to be LITERALLY true. What he says IS true, of course. But we must take it as it is meant. And we must take it very seriously. He probably uses hyperbole only to highlight a concept his hearers are likely to miss without it. When Jesus speaks in hyperbole, we must be a thousand times more careful to listen. But we’d better discern when Jesus is speaking in hyperbole, or we’ll make big mistakes in interpreting Scripture.

Nope. The Church has always taught that it is LITERALLY His Body and Blood. It still does and always will. Hyperbole does have it’s place, such as saying I am the door, or a vine. In John 6 He wasn’t speaking in hyperbole, which is why many of His followers left Him.

 

[batteddy]

Location is an accident, such as height, weight, taste, appearence, etc.

Although it is possible and permissible to phrase the mystery as “Jesus held himself in his hands”…it is more precise to say, “The bread which Jesus transubstantiated into his body had for its accident of location his hands, and the accidents remain even after the transubstantiation”

The substance of Jesus has no location AS as a substance. Substances are related spatially only through the accident location.

The accidents inhering in the substance of Jesus had his location as the Upper Room, but the accidents of the bread he transubstantiated had its location as his hands…and when the substance of bread was changed into that of Christ, the accidents of bread were preserved, including location.

Christ’s substance was related to two different locations because it was connected to 2 different sets of accidents. The one set which are his essentially and inhere in him, and the other the sacramentally preserved accidents of the bread transubstantiated.

 

[Tibbar]

epr1993:

Nope. The Church has always taught that it is LITERALLY His Body and Blood. It still does and always will. Hyperbole does have it’s place, such as saying I am the door, or a vine. In John 6 He wasn’t speaking in hyperbole, which is why many of His followers left Him.

The Roman Catholic Church maybe, but the Christian church does not universally hold that it is His literal body and blood. What it usually is an unleavened wafer and some wine or grape juice. Sorry.

Interpreting scripture with scripture, we find that idolatry is tantamount to blasphemy. To equate created things as equal to the creator of all things is idolatry.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Hi Tibbar,

I’m a bit confused by your post. Could you clarify that for me? Do you mean to say that 1) those groups that use bread and grape juice are idolators? or 2) that because there are groups that disagree with the Catholic Church that somehow the Church’s view is unsettled or unsure? or that 3) The Catholic Church is commiting the sin of idolatry in adoring the Real Presence?

Thank you!
VC

 

[MrS]

johnshelby:

Jesus wasn’t, and isn’t a man, He could be anywhere and
everywhere at the same time…

this is another case of trying to put human rules on God…

you have to forget our limitations… God is limitless…

I Am… it’s still His name… He is… always… everywhere…

Jesus is fully God… and…Jesus is fully man. One person - the second person of the Blessed Trinity. Two natures… human and divine. Never deny Jesus was/is man

 

[Montie_Claunch]

If God “has the whole world in his hand” as the elementry song goes I don’t see any less reason he couldn’t do the same with himself. So lets sing “Hes got the whole Jesus in his hands…” sorry, had too.

 

[Tibbar]

Verbum Caro:

Hi Tibbar,

I’m a bit confused by your post. Could you clarify that for me? Do you mean to say that 1) those groups that use bread and grape juice are idolators? or 2) that because there are groups that disagree with the Catholic Church that somehow the Church’s view is unsettled or unsure? or that 3) The Catholic Church is commiting the sin of idolatry in adoring the Real Presence?

Thank you!
VC

What’s behind door number three? Bingo!

Jesus said, “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit [which is invisible] and truth” (John 4:24). After Jesus ascended into heaven, Paul said true worshippers are those “who worship in the Spirit of God” (Phil. 3:3). The eternal, immortal King is invisible to those on earth until He returns (1 Tim. 1:17). Christians are called to look on “the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal” (2 Cor. 4:18). The Eucharistic god of the Catholic Church is thus a temporal god and a false Christ. Jesus warned us not to believe anyone who says, “Here is the Christ” (Mat. 24:23). Jesus Christ, the Eternal God, is now physically present at the right hand of the Father (Luke 22:69). He will not return to the earth until after the tribulation (Mat. 24:29-30). Clearly, the worship of the Eucharist is idolatry. To worship any image in the place of God provokes Him to anger. God has this to say to idolaters: “they have made Me jealous with what is not God; they have provoked Me to anger with their idols” (Deut. 32:21). The Roman Catholic Church has "exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image " and “exchanged the truth of God for a lie” (Rom. 1:23-25).

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Tibbar,

Thank you for the clarification on your position!

i must admit I am little surprised. I had gathered from your previous posts that you were once in the seminary, and that you left the Church but recently came back?

Or am I totally off base here?

Are you willing to discuss this teaching of the Church or are you adamant in your position?

God Bless,
VC

 

[johnshelby]

MrS:

Jesus is fully God… and…Jesus is fully man. One person - the second person of the Blessed Trinity. Two natures… human and divine. Never deny Jesus was/is man

no one every denied Jesus’ human nature, but to assert that
He couldn’t have held His own flesh in His hands at the last
supper, would be to deny His divine nature…

 

[Tibbar]

Verbum Caro:

Tibbar,

Thank you for the clarification on your position!

i must admit I am little surprised. I had gathered from your previous posts that you were once in the seminary, and that you left the Church but recently came back?

Or am I totally off base here?

You are correct.
Verbum Caro:

Are you willing to discuss this teaching of the Church or are you adamant in your position?

God Bless,
VC

You can give it a shot. Times have changed. When I was in the seminary twenty sum odd years ago, I just accepted what was taught. I didn’t question it. I assumed that the Catholic Church was the fullness of truth and therefore whatever it proclaimed was theologically free from error. I no longer do this.

My experience in the seminary helped me to experience the inner workings of the Church. I was able to see what was taking place and I was dismayed by what I saw. The “baby boom” generation of “celibate” men and women ordained to serve in the clergy and in religious life during the 60’s and 70’s promoted a progressivist agenda and thrust it upon the Church. Many of these were struggling with their own sexual identity. Some hadthis orientation, in secret. I rejected all of this hypocrisy, and it was the major force behind my decision not to pursue ordination.

These progressivist types, like those who lean left politically in this country, take a smug stance. They explain away people’s interest in what they call “fundamentalist” movements as motivated by a fear of the unknown in a society and Church that is changing rapidly. I disagree. I have moved toward an evangelical Christian point of view and away from a Roman Catholic perspective because I have experienced results. I cannot deny the changes that have taken place in my life since repenting and confessing Christ as my personal Savior and Lord.

The pastor of my parish is one of the progressivist baby boomer priests. I can’t stand going to Mass. I only go because it’s convenient for the time being and my wife goes with me. Before we often didn’t go to services together. I’ve also become suckered into serving. At first I did so as I didn’t realize the pastor was such a lib. I thought, “Hey wait maybe this priest is O.K.?” Wishful thinking on my part. I thought I was helping him out and taking a part in making the parish become a vibrant evangelical one like this one: stmarysgvl.org/parish.asp Boy was I wrong. Pastor envisions a Church where activist nuns in comfortable shoes are ordained to give homilies and preside at Mass.

 

[epr1993]

Tibbar:

The Roman Catholic Church maybe, but the Christian church does not universally hold that it is His literal body and blood. What it usually is an unleavened wafer and some wine or grape juice. Sorry.

Interpreting scripture with scripture, we find that idolatry is tantamount to blasphemy. To equate created things as equal to the creator of all things is idolatry.

The Christian Church universally believed in the Eucharist until the Protestant Reformation. Jesus didn’t change His mind or explain what He really meant when His followers left in John 6. He asked if the Twelve were going to leave Him too. Peter didn’t. Judas did. How are WE going to answer?

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Tibbar:

The Roman Catholic Church maybe, but the Christian church does not universally hold that it is His literal body and blood. What it usually is an unleavened wafer and some wine or grape juice. Sorry.

There’s only one Christian Church and that is the Catholic Church. Most of the early protestants who split off from the Catholic Church still believe in some level of the Real Presence of the Eucharist (whether or not they have the Eucharist is another question.) Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists etc. Puritans (Baptists) were the first ones to deny the real presence and they are a fairly late development.

 

[Michael_Francis]

Who started your religion.

If you are a member of the Jewish faith, your religion was founded by Abraham about 4,000 years ago.

If you are Hindu, your religion developed in India around l,500 B.C.

If you are a Buddhist, your religion split from Hinduism and was founded by Buddha, Prince Siddhartha Gautama of India, about 500 B.C.

If you are Roman Catholic, Jesus Christ began your religion in the year A.D. 30.

If you are Islamic, Mohammed started your religion in what is now Saudi Arabia around A.D. 600.

If you are Eastern Orthodox, your sect separated from Roman Catholicism around the year 1054.

If you are Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex-monk in the Catholic Church, in 1517.

If you belong to the Church of England (Anglican), your religion was founded by King Henry VIII in the year 1534 because the pope would not grant him a divorce with the right to remarry.

If you are a Presbyterian, your religion was founded when John Knox brought the teachings of John Calvin to Scotland in the Year 1560.

If you are Unitarian, your group developed in Europe in the 1500s.

If you are a Congregationalist, your religion branched off Puritanism in the early 1600s in England.

If you are a Baptist, you owe the tenets of your religion to John Smyth, who launched it in Amsterdam in 1607.

If you are a Methodist, your religion was founded by John and Charles Wesley in England in 1744.

If you are an Episcopalian, your religion came from England to the American colonies. It formed a separate religion founded by Samuel Seabury in 1789.

f you are a Mormon (Latter-day Saints), Joseph Smith started your church in Palmyra, N.Y. in 1830.

If you worship with the Salvation Army, your sect began with William Booth in London in 1865.

If you are a Christian Scientist, you look to 1879 as the year your religion was founded by Mary Baker Eddy.

If you are a Jehovah’s Witness, your religion was founded by Charles Taze Russell in Pennsylvania in the 1870s.

If you are Pentecostal, your religion was started in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1901.

If you are Church of Christ, your religion was started in 1906 when you broke off from the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ).

If you are an agnostic, you profess an uncertainty or a skepticism about the existence of God.

If you are an atheist, you do not believe in the existence of God.

 

[Church_Militant]

Who started your religion.

If you are a member of the Jewish faith, your religion was founded by Abraham about 4,000 years ago.

If you are Hindu, your religion developed in India around l,500 B.C.

If you are a Buddhist, your religion split from Hinduism and was founded by Buddha, Prince Siddhartha Gautama of India, about 500 B.C.

If you are Roman Catholic, Jesus Christ began your religion in the year A.D. 30.

If you are Islamic, Mohammed started your religion in what is now Saudi Arabia around A.D. 600.

If you are Eastern Orthodox, your sect separated from Roman Catholicism around the year 1054.

If you are Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex-monk in the Catholic Church, in 1517.

If you belong to the Church of England (Anglican), your religion was founded by King Henry VIII in the year 1534 because the pope would not grant him a divorce with the right to remarry.

If you are a Presbyterian, your religion was founded when John Knox brought the teachings of John Calvin to Scotland in the Year 1560.

If you are Unitarian, your group developed in Europe in the 1500s.

If you are a Congregationalist, your religion branched off Puritanism in the early 1600s in England.

If you are a Baptist, you owe the tenets of your religion to John Smyth, who launched it in Amsterdam in 1607.

If you are a Methodist, your religion was founded by John and Charles Wesley in England in 1744.

If you are an Episcopalian, your religion came from England to the American colonies. It formed a separate religion founded by Samuel Seabury in 1789.

f you are a Mormon (Latter-day Saints), Joseph Smith started your church in Palmyra, N.Y. in 1830.

If you worship with the Salvation Army, your sect began with William Booth in London in 1865.

If you are a Christian Scientist, you look to 1879 as the year your religion was founded by Mary Baker Eddy.

If you are a Jehovah’s Witness, your religion was founded by Charles Taze Russell in Pennsylvania in the 1870s.

If you are Pentecostal, your religion was started in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1901.

If you are Church of Christ, your religion was started in 1906 when you broke off from the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ).

If you are an agnostic, you profess an uncertainty or a skepticism about the existence of God.

If you are an atheist, you do not believe in the existence of God.

 

[IesusDeus]

“Christ held Himself in His hands when He gave His Body to His disciples saying: ‘This is My Body.’ No one partakes of this Flesh before he has adored it,”

- St. Augustine

 

[Mike_Gallagher]

Tibba, you seem to have seen many things which have caused you great dissapointment with the Catholic Church. I can sense in the tone of your writing that things have made you feel quite bitter. Please don’t write off 2,000 years of Church doctrine because of the misguided failings of some Catholics over the last 40 years. All Catholics alive today are suffering from the effects of this liberal age (which may be coming to an end soon). But the Church has faced battles against every imaginable attack for her entire history, and is still here, thanks be to the Lord.
I guess you don’t need me to tell you how far back belief in the Real Prescence goes, just that it pre-dates protestantism by about 1500 years.
A couple of days ago I had some Jehovas Witnesses at the door, and they were trying to prove to me that the Catholic Church must be wrong because of all the scandals that had been going on etc. My response was that these people are examples of what can happen by not obeying the teachings of the Church. I asked them why the looked the failings of a few to prove their point, when they could look at the thousands upon thousands of Saints. These Saints had attained sainthood because they completely surrendered themselves to God and lived according to the teachings of the Church. This is the real fruit of the Catholic faith.
So I encourage you, that even though we are struggling in the aftershocks of liberal times, these will pass, and the Church will go on to the finish by the grace of God and the promises of Christ.
All she has taught is still true today, and it will never change.
I hope this is taken in the way it is intended.
God Bless

 

[epr1993]

Tibbar:

What’s behind door number three? Bingo!

Jesus said, “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit [which is invisible] and truth” (John 4:24). After Jesus ascended into heaven, Paul said true worshippers are those “who worship in the Spirit of God” (Phil. 3:3). The eternal, immortal King is invisible to those on earth until He returns (1 Tim. 1:17). Christians are called to look on “the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal” (2 Cor. 4:18). The Eucharistic god of the Catholic Church is thus a temporal god and a false Christ. Jesus warned us not to believe anyone who says, “Here is the Christ” (Mat. 24:23). Jesus Christ, the Eternal God, is now physically present at the right hand of the Father (Luke 22:69). He will not return to the earth until after the tribulation (Mat. 24:29-30). Clearly, the worship of the Eucharist is idolatry. To worship any image in the place of God provokes Him to anger. God has this to say to idolaters: “they have made Me jealous with what is not God; they have provoked Me to anger with their idols” (Deut. 32:21). The Roman Catholic Church has "exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image " and “exchanged the truth of God for a lie” (Rom. 1:23-25).

 

[epr1993]

Sorry, I hit the submit button without actually posting anything. It’s good for humility…

If you put the next verse after Matt 24:23 it is clear that our Lord is warning about false messiahs and prophets, not the Eucharist which He Himself instituted. Matt 24:29-30 states that we shall “see the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of heaven with power and great glory”. Agreed! In Matt 28:20, the last verse of this Gospel, Jesus says, “Behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.” Jesus is still with us in the Eucharist but we will see Him coming in glory at the end of the age.

Luke 22:69 is where Jesus makes a Divinity claim. It is an allusion to Psalm 110. Every good Jew had the Psalms memorized and understood what He was saying (Luke 22:70) when He quoted the first line of the Psalm. It’s like saying, “Mary had a little lamb”; we instantly think of the rest. The Psalm also says that Jesus is a priest forever in the line of Melchizedek, who offered bread and wine. Jesus comanded us to “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24), *Totou poiete eis tan emen anamenesin, *a line which has sacrificial overtones to it. This is probably the earliest written account of the Last Supper, from around 57 AD. It is the pure sacrifice foretold in Mal 1:11. If Jesus only sacrificed Himself once, and He told us to continue to offer that one, pure sacrifice, then it is the very same sacrifice. That is Jesus on the altar.

Everyone knew what He was saying in John 6. Our Lord even changed the verb (from *phago *to trogo) that He used after verse 54 to be sure that there was no confusion. No one left Him when He spoke in hyperbole. At the Last Supper He said “This is my Body”. Either He is lying or He is telling the truth. The Eucharist is not the “no god” that the Israelites were worshiping in Deut 32, nor is it “an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes” that St Paul wrote about in Rom 1:23-25. It is the Lord Himself.

Coming back to the original question of this thread, how did Jesus hold Himself in His hands at the Last Supper? Because He is God, because He can, and because He did.