R
rcwitness
Guest
Then you call the Catholic Eucharist a deception?
- Status
R
rcwitness
Guest
There are conditions of lack of knowledge of innocent faithful connected to this section of the Catechism. Furthermore, its the Catholic faith accepted that brings some into salvation (and God’s will done in their lives), not the Catholic faith rejected (and His will denied).rcwitness:
If it is a deception that God calls people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist then it follows that the statement above is a deception. If the Holy Spirit uses these Churches as a means of salvation then it is accomplished without the Catholic Eucharist if they are separate from it.
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
That is not my judgement to make either.
R
rcwitness
Guest
By saying that God calls some to a Eucharist meal separate from the Catholic Eucharist, you already have made that judgment.rcwitness:
That is not my judgement to make either.
R
rcwitness
Guest
Let me ask you this:
What do you think about St. Justin’s Teachings about the Eucharist? He preached the Gospel long before most all others
What do you think about St. Justin’s Teachings about the Eucharist? He preached the Gospel long before most all others
W
Wannano
Guest
Then so have you my friend.Wannano:
By saying that God calls some to a Eucharist meal separate from the Catholic Eucharist, you already have made that judgment.rcwitness:
That is not my judgement to make either.
W
Wannano
Guest
I thought your quote of him in post 641 was quite representative of non-Catholic teaching of Communion in general. It does not speak of Tansubstantation at all to me.
R
rcwitness
Guest
This quote???rcwitness:
I thought your quote of him in post 641 was quite representative of non-Catholic teaching of Communion in general. It does not speak of Tansubstantation at all to me.
…Not as ordinary bread or as ordinary drink do we partake of them, but just as, through the word of God, our Savior Jesus Christ became Incarnate and took upon Himself flesh and blood for our salvation, so, we have been taught, the food which has been made the Eucharist bv the prayer of His word and which nourishes our flesh and blood by assimilation, is both the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.…
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
Yes. Do you see Transubstantiation in that?
R
rcwitness
Guest
Its actually a proper definition of Transubstantiation!
Especially this part:
…has been made the Eucharist bv the prayer of His word and which nourishes our flesh and blood by assimilation, is both the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.
Especially this part:
…has been made the Eucharist bv the prayer of His word and which nourishes our flesh and blood by assimilation, is both the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.
W
Wannano
Guest
If that is the case what is the definition of "Eucharist? "
R
rcwitness
Guest
This Wiki description is cool:
The term “Eucharist” (thanksgiving) is that by which the rite is referred[6] by the Didache (late 1st or early 2nd century),[10][11][12][13][14] Ignatius of Antioch (who died between 98 and 117)[13][15] and Justin Martyr (writing between 147 and 167).[11][13][16] Today, “the Eucharist” is the name still used by Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Presbyterians, and Lutherans. Other Protestant or Evangelical denominations rarely use this term, preferring either “Communion”, “the Lord’s Supper”, or “the Breaking of Bread”.
It is a thanksgiving (on our part), it is a Rite (according to the observance), and it is His flesh and blood (according to the consecration).
The term “Eucharist” (thanksgiving) is that by which the rite is referred[6] by the Didache (late 1st or early 2nd century),[10][11][12][13][14] Ignatius of Antioch (who died between 98 and 117)[13][15] and Justin Martyr (writing between 147 and 167).[11][13][16] Today, “the Eucharist” is the name still used by Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Presbyterians, and Lutherans. Other Protestant or Evangelical denominations rarely use this term, preferring either “Communion”, “the Lord’s Supper”, or “the Breaking of Bread”.
It is a thanksgiving (on our part), it is a Rite (according to the observance), and it is His flesh and blood (according to the consecration).
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
So if you are content with that definition it surprises me because it does not speak of Transubstantiation at all, it rather says it becomes Communion or Breaking of Bread as referred to in Acts. I do not see in this where anyone on earth is making the bread and wine into Jesus’ physical body , rather, as Jesus said at the Last Supper “this is my body.”
R
rcwitness
Guest
St Justin says “made the Eucharist by the prayer of His Word…”
That is consecrating the gifts of bread and wine into the substance of Jesus’ body and blood.
That is consecrating the gifts of bread and wine into the substance of Jesus’ body and blood.
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
Made the Eucharist can also be a reflection of the exclamation that it is not just ordinary food and drink but that it is set apart for the Holy purpose of "Communion. Not that it is made into His physical body before consumption but that when it is consumed it is not consumed as mere food and drink but is spiritually nourishing as His body and blood. I have never been to a Communion where there has not been a prayer of Thanks just as Jesus did.
To ask "does God call people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist " is seemingly ridiculous when you consider that Jesus never referred to His Eucharist or “Communion” as anything Catholic. He instructed His followers to do as He did and we all do. We are all the Church, the bride of Christ even with differing ideas of what’s important. If you say God only is the judge then there is no problem is there?
R
rcwitness
Guest
Just because I say God is the judge does not mean there are not evident problems and unholy divisions.
Similarly, giving God thanks and using bread and wine do not mean there are not significant oppositions in what we proclaim Jesus to Teach and mean in His Teachings.
St Justin cannot get any clearer in describing the Eucharist as the same flesh and blood which was the Word incarnate to the flesh. This is no longer bread and wine, but the same substance of the incarnation, yet hidden from our carnal senses, so that faith is the means to celebrate, and not a means of a miraculous sign which does not require faith at all
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
And in all you wrote here there is no evidence of Transubstantiation.Wannano:
Just because I say God is the judge does not mean there are not evident problems and unholy divisions.
Similarly, giving God thanks and using bread and wine do not mean there are not significant oppositions in what we proclaim Jesus to Teach and mean in His Teachings.
St Justin cannot get any clearer in describing the Eucharist as the same flesh and blood which was the Word incarnate to the flesh. This is no longer bread and wine, but the same substance of the incarnation, yet hidden from our carnal senses, so that faith is the means to celebrate, and not a means of a miraculous sign which does not require faith at all
R
rcwitness
Guest
Well maybe your concept of transubstantiation is wrong. Im not sure. But the way St Justin and St Ignatius explain the Sacrament, it sure looks like Transubstantiation to me. At the least, a far cry from symbolic only (no change in the consecrated host).
S
steve-b
Guest
- Pope Stephen was rebuking rebaptism.
VIII. REBAPTISM from Baptism | Catholic Answers
To complete the consideration of the validity of baptism conferred by heretics, we must give some account of the celebrated controversy that raged around this point in the ancient Church. In Africa and Asia Minor the custom had been introduced in the early part of the third century of rebaptizing all converts from heresy. As far as can be now ascertained, the practice of rebaptism arose in Africa owing to decrees of a Synod of Carthage held probably between 218 and 222; while in Asia Minor it seems to have had its origin at the Synod of Iconium, celebrated between 230 and 235. The controversy on rebaptism is especially connected with the names of Pope St. Stephen and of St. Cyprian of Carthage. The latter was the main champion of the practice of rebaptizing. The pope, however, absolutely condemned the practice, and commanded that heretics on entering the Church should receive only the imposition of hands in cenitentiam. In this celebrated controversy it is to be noted that Pope Stephen declares that he is upholding the primitive custom when he declares for the validity of baptism conferred by heretics. Cyprian, on the contrary, implicitly admits that antiquity is against his own practice, but stoutly maintains that it is more in accordance with an enlightened study of the subject. The tradition against him he declares to be “a human and unlawful tradition”. Neither Cyprian, however, nor his zealous abettor, Firmilian, could show that rebaptism was older than the century in which they were living. The contemporaneous but anonymous author of the book “De Rebaptismate” says that the ordinances of Pope Stephen, forbidding the rebaptism of converts, are in accordance with antiquity and ecclesiastical tradition, and are consecrated as an ancient, memorable, and solemn observance of all the saints and of all the faithful. St. Augustine believes that the custom of not rebaptizing is an Apostolic tradition, and St. Vincent of Lerins declares that the Synod of Carthage introduced rebaptism against the Divine law (canonem), against the rule of the universal Church, and against the customs and institutions of the ancients. By Pope Stephen’s decision, he continues, antiquity was retained and novelty was destroyed (retenta est antiquitas, explosa novitas)…
- Re: non Catholic baptism Is Valid Baptism Enough to Be a Catholic? | Catholic Answers
Last edited:
R
rcwitness
Guest
Let me also ask you this:
Would your pastor be comfortable quoting St Justin’s Eucharistic Teaching next time he celebrates the Lord’s Supper?
Would your pastor be comfortable quoting St Justin’s Eucharistic Teaching next time he celebrates the Lord’s Supper?
- Status