Help w/ transubstanciation

  • Thread starter Thread starter evafrisch
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Savedsinner

Your post is excellent.

Congratulations.

Sometimes in CAF I think I sound like a liberal skeptical Protestant, However to me this forum is about Sacred Scripture and thus should stick to sola scriptura.

You wrote:

you will not find it spelled out like it was in the Fourth Lateran Council In 1215.

I wish I could express my views with your clarity.

I usually associate transubstantiation with the Council of Nicea (325 CE) and Constantinople I (381 CE).

*CREDO … in unum Dominum Iesum Christum, Filium Dei unigenitum, …consubstantialem Patri; per quem omnia facta sunt *
 
John 6 (New American Standard Bible)
47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 "I am the bread of life. 49 "Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 “This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51"I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.” 52 Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” 53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57"As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. 58 “This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.”
Matthew 26
26 While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” 27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; 28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.
Mark 14
22 While they were eating, He took some bread, and after a blessing He broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is My body.” 23 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, and they all drank from it. 24 And He said to them, "This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. Luke 22
15 And He said to them, "I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; 19 And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.
Luke 24
30 When He had reclined at the table with them, He took the bread and blessed it, and breaking it, He began giving it to them. 31 Then their eyes were opened and they recognized Him; and He vanished from their sight.

Saint Paul 1 Corinthians 10 15 I speak as to wise men; you judge what I say. 16 Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ? 17 Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one bread. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.
1 Corinthians 11 1 Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ. 2 Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. 23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same way He took the cup also 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 Lord’s death until He comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup.29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep.31 But if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged.
 
Chet

thank you for your post.

In it you give quotations which show that Jesus changed bread and wine into his body and blood.

However I consider this is the fact. Transubstantiation is a theoretical rationalization of this change. Nowhere do the scriptures mention transubstantiation.

Much less prove it.
 
NoelFitz said:
Chet

thank you for your post.

In it you give quotations which show that Jesus changed bread and wine into his body and blood.

However I consider this is the fact. Transubstantiation is a theoretical rationalization of this change. Nowhere do the scriptures mention transubstantiation.

Much less prove it.
Click to expand...
But Noel isn’t this what’s happening.

Jesus, Who can create something out of nothing, simply by saying, “Let there be 'whatever’”, says, “This is my Body”. And yet the Apostles looked and still saw Bread. Isn’t this exactly what happens in the Catholic term of “Transubstantiation”?
 
NoelFitz,
I had to google your signature to make sure I translated it correctly…lol…
Here is the English translation:
‘in certain things unity; in doubtful things liberty; in all things charity’
This is what I found:
“The Latin phrase ‘in necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas’ means ‘in certain things unity; in doubtful things liberty; in all things charity’. It is often misattributed to St. Augustine of Hippo, but seems to have been first used in the seventeenth century by a German Lutheran theologian called Rupertus Meldenius in the form ‘in necesariis unita, in non-necessariis liberta, in utrisque charita’, meaning ‘in certain things, unity; in uncertain things, liberty; and in both, charity’. It is widely quoted in defence of theological and religious freedom. This phrase is the motto of the ÖCV, the association of Catholic student fraternities of Austria.” (from Wikipedia)

Amen!
Barbara
 
Justacloserwalk

‘in certain things, unity; in uncertain things, liberty; and in both, charity’. It is widely quoted in defence of theological and religious freedom. This phrase is the motto of the ÖCV, the association of Catholic student fraternities of Austria." (from Wikipedia)

Do you think this is appropriate?

In the CAF most seem faithful Catholic believers, but there is great freedom of expression. I consider that in Biblical studies each individual Catholic is free to interpret the Bible in any way (s)he wants, provided Church doctrine is not contradicted.

Also in CAF there seems to be, in general, respectful discussions. Even believers in the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) are listened to.
 
joemizzi said:
You may be interested to know how St Augustine interpreted John 6.

justforcatholics.org/bread.htm
Click to expand...
Hello, Dr. Mizzi, and welcome to the Catholic Answers forums!

I notice that your site provided quotations only when you believe St. Augustine to believe with your position on this matter. There are other quotes which prove otherwise:

“That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God IS THE BODY OF CHRIST. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, IS THE BLOOD OF CHRIST. Through that bread and wine the Lord Christ willed to commend HIS BODY AND BLOOD, WHICH HE POURED OUT FOR US UNTO THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS.” (Sermons 227)

“The Lord Jesus wanted those whose eyes were held lest they should recognize him, to recognize Him in the breaking of the bread [Luke 24:16,30-35]. The faithful know what I am saying. They know Christ in the breaking of the bread. For not all bread, but only that which receives the blessing of Christ, BECOMES CHRIST’S BODY.” (Sermons 234:2)

“What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that THE BREAD IS THE BODY OF CHRIST AND THE CHALICE [WINE] THE BLOOD OF CHRIST.” (Sermons 272)

“How this ‘And he was carried in his own hands’] should be understood literally of David, we cannot discover; but we can discover how it is meant of Christ. FOR CHRIST WAS CARRIED IN HIS OWN HANDS, WHEN, REFERRING TO HIS OWN BODY, HE SAID: ‘THIS IS MY BODY.’ FOR HE CARRIED THAT BODY IN HIS HANDS.” (Psalms 33:1:10)

Source: bringyou.to/apologetics/num30.htm

There are plenty of other Augustinian quotes on that page that prove your assertion to be false. Next time, it would behoove you to gather all the facts before making such conclusions about the beliefs of this great Catholic saint.
 
You are misusing Augustine’s figurative writings to support the doctrine of transubstantiation. The following example is a case in point:

That bread, which you can see on the altar, sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That cup, or rather what the cup contains, sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ. It was by means of these things that the Lord Christ wished to present us with his body and blood, which he shed for our sake for the forgiveness of sins. If you receive them well, you are yourselves what you receive. You see, the apostle says, We, being many, are one loaf, one body (1 Cor. 10.17). That’s how he explained the sacrament of the Lord’s Table; one loaf, one body, is what we all are, many though we be (Augustine, Sermons, 227).
Augustine believed that in a sense the elements are the body and blood of Jesus. “The bread…is the body of Christ…that cup…is the blood of Christ.” In what sense is he speaking? Is the substance of the bread changed into the body of Christ? Or is bread the body of Christ in a symbolic sense? We can readily discover the answer to this all important question.

First, looking at the context, it is clear that Augustine is using figurative language. Just as he asserts that the bread is the body of Christ, he is equally emphatic that Christians are one loaf, one body. Clearly, he means that the one Eucharistic loaf represents the unity among believers. Similarly, “by means of these things” - the bread and the cup - the Lord presents his people with his body and blood. The Eucharistic elements are the figure or sign of Christ, as Augustine asserts explicitly elsewhere in his writings:
  • The Lord did not hesitate to say: “This is My Body”, when He wanted to give a sign of His body” (Augustine, Against Adimant).
  • He [Christ] committed and delivered to His disciples the figure of His Body and Blood” (Augustine, on Psalm 3).
  • [The sacraments] bear the names of the realities which they resemble. As, therefore, in a certain manner the sacrament of Christ’s body is Christ’s body, and the sacrament of Christ’s blood is Christ’s blood” (Augustine, Letter 98, From Augustine to Boniface).
  • The Eucharist is the figure of the body and blood of Jesus. Since the bread and wine represent the body and blood of Christ, it is acceptable to call them His body and His blood. The bread resembles the body; therefore it is called the body even though it is not the reality it represents. That is perfectly normal in figurative language.
Augustine believed that the bread and cup were signs, which he defines in this manner: “a sign is a thing which, over and above the impression it makes on the senses, causes something else to come into the mind as a consequence of itself” (On Christian Doctrine, 2, 1). Therefore, when we see the bread, something else comes to mind, namely, the body of Christ. The mistake of the modern Catholic Church is to confuse the sign with the reality it represents.

“Now, as to follow the letter, and to take signs (such as the sacrament of the body and blood of the Lord) for the things that are signified by them, is a mark of weakness and bondage; so to interpret signs wrongly is the result of being misled by error" (Augustine, On Christian Doctrine 3,9). To confuse the bread (the sign) for the body of Christ (the signified) is, according to Augustine, weakness, bondage and error.
 
NoelFitz said:
Justacloserwalk

‘in certain things, unity; in uncertain things, liberty; and in both, charity’. It is widely quoted in defence of theological and religious freedom. This phrase is the motto of the ÖCV, the association of Catholic student fraternities of Austria." (from Wikipedia)

Do you think this is appropriate?

In the CAF most seem faithful Catholic believers, but there is great freedom of expression. I consider that in Biblical studies each individual Catholic is free to interpret the Bible in any way (s)he wants, provided Church doctrine is not contradicted.

Also in CAF there seems to be, in general, respectful discussions. Even believers in the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) are listened to.
Click to expand...
NoelFitz,
I am not sure what you mean, I meant no disrespect.
My comment on your signature was apart from thread being discussed.

I was rather pleased that I recognized it in Latin…and yes that is pride coming through.

I enjoy the dialogue here. There is food for the mind as we discuss food for the spirit.

In the information I gave they said the source was a 17th century Lutheran, not St Augustine.

I saw the irony when I found the translation of the phrase.

God Bless!
Barbara
 
Barbara

You wrote:

*I am not sure what you mean, I meant no disrespect.
My comment on your signature was apart from thread being discussed.

I was rather pleased that I recognized it in Latin…and yes that is pride coming through.*

I am not too sure what I meant myself, so I cannot think you meant disrespect.

Were you querying the fact that Catholics have freedom in Bible studies?
 
NoelFitz said:
Barbara

You wrote:

*I am not sure what you mean, I meant no disrespect.
My comment on your signature was apart from thread being discussed.

I was rather pleased that I recognized it in Latin…and yes that is pride coming through.*

I am not too sure what I meant myself, so I cannot think you meant disrespect.

Were you querying the fact that Catholics have freedom in Bible studies?
Click to expand...
Interesting take on that NoelFitz.
I am not a Catholic. Do you think you have freedom in bible studies?
As for myself, I think there is a difference between application of sacred scripture, interpretation and redefining doctrine.
Cults “redefine” doctrine all the time. I am referring to the doctrine set forth in the Apostles Creed.
There are certain things that make us distinctly Christian.
Much of what we differ on is not basic tenants as much as “man made” things.
We are the ones who set “denominations” and put up walls.
I think that application is something we can do, and should do…because we have things that are unique to each of us. I am speaking of the way I deal with a problem that differs from your problem.
I do not think that we are “twinkie” Christians. Your struggles with your flesh are not mine so a particular passage of scripture will meet your need at that time.

Does that answer your question?
Barbara.
 
Barbara

Q: Do you think you have freedom in bible studies?
A: Yes

You wrote:
Much of what we differ on is not basic tenants as much as “man made” things.

I agree completely.

Christians, including Catholics, believe that Jesus is Lord.

The Pope has said in Jesus of Nazareth (2007):
…this book… is solely an expression of my personal search…Everyone is free, then, to contradict me (pp xxiii, xxiv).

One thing that really annoys me is when people claim that Catholics believe something absurd and then show how absurd this is. This setting up of “Aunt Sallies”, or straw men, is most irritating.

In fact there are few doctrines in Catholicism, and also a huge spectrum of beliefs.

However this discussion is about transubstanciation = transubstantiation.
 
[NoelFitz,
I have a terrible habit of getting :“off” the thread. We are on the same page my friend.
God Bless!
Barbara

QUOTE=NoelFitz;2316593]Barbara

Q: Do you think you have freedom in bible studies?
A: Yes

You wrote:
Much of what we differ on is not basic tenants as much as “man made” things.

I agree completely.

Christians, including Catholics, believe that Jesus is Lord.

The Pope has said in Jesus of Nazareth (2007):
…this book… is solely an expression of my personal search…Everyone is free, then, to contradict me (pp xxiii, xxiv).

One thing that really annoys me is when people claim that Catholics believe something absurd and then show how absurd this is. This setting up of “Aunt Sallies”, or straw men, is most irritating.

In fact there are few doctrines in Catholicism, and also a huge spectrum of beliefs.

However this discussion is about transubstanciation = transubstantiation.
 
savedsinner said:
I appologize for my rant last night, I was pulling your legs, I am catholic, and I actually don’t think that James White is the greatest theological mind in the world.🤷
Click to expand...
I knew it. It was great devil’s advocacy, but I had you pegged after about your third or fourth response. James White is small potatoes - like sending in your great grandmother to pitch to Babe Ruth.
 
tm30 said:
I knew it. It was great devil’s advocacy, but I had you pegged after about your third or fourth response. James White is small potatoes - like sending in your great grandmother to pitch to Babe Ruth.
Click to expand...
Were you poking fun at those who actually believe what you said?
I wonder how many people believed the joke?

This shows a lack of respect for all of us.

You perpetuated a lie, not “pulling our leg”

It was not a kind or loving thing to do and it certainly wasn’t funny.

Barbara
 
justacloserwalk said:
Were you poking fun at those who actually believe what you said?
I wonder how many people believed the joke?

This shows a lack of respect for all of us.

You perpetuated a lie, not “pulling our leg”

It was not a kind or loving thing to do and it certainly wasn’t funny.

Barbara
Click to expand...
Who TM30? Or Saved Sinner?

TM, couldn’t call savedsinner out, or it would have made him look like a jerk (or maybe that was my job…).
 
Speaking of signs:

Does anyone know of a sign that points to another sign (other than the Protestant belief that the Eucharist was a symbol)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top