For Lampo only

  • Thread starter Thread starter NDfan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NDfan

Guest
Lampo said:
Do *any *Early Church Fathers agree with you that the Eucharist is merely symbolic?
Click to expand...
Yes but you wouldn’t agree that they do. Ignatius for example does not state that the Eucharist is the physical body and blood of Christ. His letter is written in response to heretics that flat out denied Jesus. Here’s the famous quote:

“Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God”

Ignatius is speaking of those who don’t accept Jesus as their savior.

“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes”

If you read his entire letter you will see how this statement makes sense. Ignatius is not referring to those who don’t admit to the real presence. He’s addressing those that flat out don’t believe in Jesus. Partaking in the Lord’s supper is how we outwardly profess our Faith. Ignatius is saying that these folks abstain from the Eucharist because they don’t confess that Jesus is their savior. The heretics were stating that Christians were just eating ordinary bread for no good reason.

Keep in mind that during this time the heresy was completely out of control. Marcion was completely re-writing the Gospel of Luke and some of Paul’s letters to support his claims. The Gnostics were corrupting the church and so were the Montanists. Ignatius was the one who eventually got so fed up with the bad behavior that he stated nothing should be done without the authority of an appointed Bishop. He also wanted church members to submit to the Elders and Deacons.

Lampo I would highly suggest you read Christ in the Passover. I attended a ceremony that was conducted by a Jew for Jesus and it was incredible. My faith was actually strengthened and I also realize how wrong the Jews are for rejecting Jesus.

Do some research on the afikomen meal and notice the parallels to the Lord’s supper. Also read about the seder meal and how the elements of the seder were completely symbolic. Without the Temple the Jews have no way of sacrificing a Lamb for the passover now. So instead they symbolize the Lamb with a shank bone on the seder plate and then eat the Matza bread to symbolize the body of the Lamb after the seder. In addition they drink the 3rd cup of the seder with this bread which is red wine mixed with warm water to symbolize the blood of the lamb. Irenaeus refers to this same mixture of wine and water. This 3rd cup is called the cup of redemption and is how GOD redeemed the Jews from Pharaoh. Well how does GOD redeem us now? The blood of Christ. So when Christ took the cup after the seder meal which was the 3rd cup of redemption, he was re-purposing it for lack of a better way of stating it. This 3rd cup now symbolized HIS blood as the blood of redemption. That’s why he calls it the new covenant. The blood that is shed for all mankind so that sins may be forgiven. Instead of the passover Lambs from the Exodus it’s Christ as the final sacrifical Lamb.

I do recall a few ECFs that referred to the bread and wine as elements that represented Christ but I have to find it. I lost the link I had for that.

PEACE
 
NDfan said:
Yes but you wouldn’t agree that they do. Ignatius for example does not state that the Eucharist is the physical body and blood of Christ. His letter is written in response to heretics that flat out denied Jesus. Here’s the famous quote:

“Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God”

Ignatius is speaking of those who don’t accept Jesus as their savior.

“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes”

If you read his entire letter you will see how this statement makes sense. Ignatius is not referring to those who don’t admit to the real presence. He’s addressing those that flat out don’t believe in Jesus. Partaking in the Lord’s supper is how we outwardly profess our Faith. Ignatius is saying that these folks abstain from the Eucharist because they don’t confess that Jesus is their savior. The heretics were stating that Christians were just eating ordinary bread for no good reason.

Keep in mind that during this time the heresy was completely out of control. Marcion was completely re-writing the Gospel of Luke and some of Paul’s letters to support his claims. The Gnostics were corrupting the church and so were the Montanists. Ignatius was the one who eventually got so fed up with the bad behavior that he stated nothing should be done without the authority of an appointed Bishop. He also wanted church members to submit to the Elders and Deacons.

Lampo I would highly suggest you read Christ in the Passover. I attended a ceremony that was conducted by a Jew for Jesus and it was incredible. My faith was actually strengthened and I also realize how wrong the Jews are for rejecting Jesus.

Do some research on the afikomen meal and notice the parallels to the Lord’s supper. Also read about the seder meal and how the elements of the seder were completely symbolic. Without the Temple the Jews have no way of sacrificing a Lamb for the passover now. So instead they symbolize the Lamb with a shank bone on the seder plate and then eat the Matza bread to symbolize the body of the Lamb after the seder. In addition they drink the 3rd cup of the seder with this bread which is red wine mixed with warm water to symbolize the blood of the lamb. Irenaeus refers to this same mixture of wine and water. This 3rd cup is called the cup of redemption and is how GOD redeemed the Jews from Pharaoh. Well how does GOD redeem us now? The blood of Christ. So when Christ took the cup after the seder meal which was the 3rd cup of redemption, he was re-purposing it for lack of a better way of stating it. This 3rd cup now symbolized HIS blood as the blood of redemption. That’s why he calls it the new covenant. The blood that is shed for all mankind so that sins may be forgiven. Instead of the passover Lambs from the Exodus it’s Christ as the final sacrifical Lamb.

I do recall a few ECFs that referred to the bread and wine as elements that represented Christ but I have to find it. I lost the link I had for that.

PEACE
Click to expand...
I might read some of what you suggested. Thanks. Have you ever read The Lamb’s Supper or The Hunt for the Fourth Cup both by Scott Hahn?
 
NDfan said:
Yes but you wouldn’t agree that they do.
Click to expand...
I would agree if one says something like, “It is merely symbolic” or “It is not literally the body of Christ, but just a symbol.”
 
earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-smyrnaeans-roberts.html
CHAPTER VII.–LET US STAND ALOOF FROM SUCH HERETICS. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, 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 in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that ye should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion[of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.
Click to expand...
Just one of many. Lamb’s Supper will change your life and make sense out of a lot of stuff commonly misunderstood by Catholic even.
 
Lampo said:
I might read some of what you suggested. Thanks. Have you ever read The Lamb’s Supper or The Hunt for the Fourth Cup both by Scott Hahn?
Click to expand...
The Lamb’s supper yes but not the other. Actually have not seen that one.
 
vocatio said:
earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-smyrnaeans-roberts.html

Just one of many. Lamb’s Supper will change your life and make sense out of a lot of stuff commonly misunderstood by Catholic even.
Click to expand...
Vocatio thanks for the link. I’ve read this as well as the Lambs Supper.

I will say this. I good lesson I received in theology is whenever Christ institued anything that had to do with our Faith HE is always present somehow. In Baptism the Holy Spirit fills us, where 2 or 3 are gathered in Jesus name HE is with us etc. So to think Jesus would give us the Lord’s Supper without somehow being part of it really doesn’t make sense. That’s why I don’t believe Jesus is only present in the RCC. That’s saying Jesus will only respond to a RCC Priest which is unscriptural given that we are all called to a Priestly life.

PEACE
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top