How do protestants explain the time between Christ and the reformation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eark
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
lanman87 said:
Hippolytus
Click to expand...
The Eucharist has been understood from the beginning to be Jesus in some way – spiritual or literal. But in my findings there was always some sort of “real presence” believed in the Early Church. In other words, you are hard pressed to make a case for the Early Church’s view on the Eucharist to resemble, say, what the Baptist Church of today teaches.

I tell folks who are on the fence to read the Didache and the 1st apology of Justin Martyr. Especially those parts talking about the Eucharist – then attend a Evangelical service and Catholic Mass or Divine liturgy in Eastern Orthodoxy, then ask yourself which one resembles the Early Church.

In regards to the Father you quote, I am in agreement that it is a symbol – until it is blessed and consecration actually takes place.

And often times you have to read the entire body of work to get the full message. In regards to Justin martyr he says:

And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us [deacons] give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion

Welp, he must believe in symbolic stuff right? Nope, just a chapter later says this:

so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the [prayer]) of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that [Jesus] who was made flesh

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm
 
Last edited:
Why would he or she be banned merely because of the question that was originally posted? As long as a civil and fair tone is maintained, most religious forums are not so quick to kick people out.
 
Last edited:
lanman87 said:
40.png
adf417:
Ianman are you under the impression that the Church considers all saints to have been perfect in their views and opinions? This is certainly not the case. As a matter of fact, there is not one saint that the Church views as being perfect in all matters.
Click to expand...
I have know idea the criteria used for sainthood. I just find it ironic that someone says
lanman87 said:
The bread,which is the symbol of the Body of Christ; and the bowl of mixed wine, which is the symbol of the Blood which has been shed for all who believe in him;
Click to expand...
and he became a Catholic saint and yet when my Pastor says almost the exact same thing on Sunday morning he is teaching heresy. Something about that just doesn’t add up.
Click to expand...
The church does recognize the the symbolism in the Eucharist. It is one of the both-and’s of our faith. Do you have any proof Hippolytus taught against the real presence? Is your pastor teaching the real presence along with the symbolic view?

Nothing ironic here when you consider the whole picture.

Peace!!!
 
Depends on the forums. CARM, for example, will ban Catholics for virtually anything.
 
Last edited:
Lenten_ashes said:
Depends on the forums. CARM, for example, will ban Catholics for virtually anything.
Click to expand...
CARM is an anti-Catholic website. Since the owner, Matt Slick, is so anti-Catholic, why does he bother allowing Catholics to join?
 
adf417 said:
It is one of the both-and’s of our faith.
Click to expand...
How can something be both a symbol of something and literally be the same thing? I can understand how you can be one thing and a symbol of something else. The American Flag stands for freedom but it is not freedom, it is a flag.

If the bread and wine are symbols of Christ then they aren’t the flesh and blood of Christ then they are symbols of Christ Flesh and Blood. If the bread and wine are Christ flesh and blood then they aren’t symbols, they are flesh and blood. You can’t be both at the same time.

I suppose you could say that to Christians they are Flesh and Blood but to non-Christians they are symbols. But the problem with that the vast majority of the church fathers (Other than the apologist) aren’t writing to non-Christians they are writing to Christians and would always use literal language if they both had a literal view.
 
lilypadrees said:
40.png
Lenten_ashes:
Depends on the forums. CARM, for example, will ban Catholics for virtually anything.
Click to expand...
CARM is an anti-Catholic website. Since the owner, Matt Slick, is so anti-Catholic, why does he bother allowing Catholics to join?
Click to expand...
How can they ban Catholics if they don’t let them join? :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:
 
Possible Roman Catholic explanation:

The bread and wine, before the consecration, can be mere symbols for the Body and Blood of Christ. Even after the consecration, the appearances by themselves could be seen as symbols of the Real Presence.
 
Isearch said:
Possible Roman Catholic explanation:

The bread and wine, before the consecration, can be mere symbols for the Body and Blood of Christ. Even after the consecration, the appearances by themselves could be seen as symbols of the Real Presence.
Click to expand...
We attended a Lutheran service this last Sunday and I intently listened to how the Communion service was enacted. There never was any mention of Real Presence. When the invitation was given for visitors to partake, he minister invited all who know Jesus to partake and explained that they use grape juice as a symbol of wine.
 
This is strange, I thought the Lutherans officially believe in the Real presence (although different from the Roman Catholic position of Transubstantiation).
 
True. Very true. :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes: I guess they think they’ll convert us. And when we don’t convert, they ban us.
 
Depending on who you ask, Lutherans believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, affirming the doctrine of sacramental union “in which the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present, offered, and received with the bread and wine.”

When I asked a Lutheran on another forum years ago what they believe, she said they believe in consubstantiation, a term the Lutheran’s here on CAF seem to bristle at, rather than transubstantiation.

The way she explained consubstantion to me, Lutherans use the term to describe their belief that Jesus is present “in, with and under the forms of consecrated bread and wine”.
 
Isearch said:
This is strange, I thought the Lutherans officially believe in the Real presence (although different from the Roman Catholic position of Transubstantiation).
Click to expand...
They do. That one pastor is heterodox in practice is an indication that one pastor is heterodox.
For more information, read the Book of Concord
 
Hodos said:
Keep in mind that Cardinal Newman came from an ecclesiastical background that pretty much saw itself as Catholic in all but name only to begin with.
Click to expand...
No, he didn’t. He helped create that strain in the Anglican Church. That was not the case before him and the other Tractarians.
 
Wannano said:
40.png
Isearch:
Possible Roman Catholic explanation:

The bread and wine, before the consecration, can be mere symbols for the Body and Blood of Christ. Even after the consecration, the appearances by themselves could be seen as symbols of the Real Presence.
Click to expand...
We attended a Lutheran service this last Sunday and I intently listened to how the Communion service was enacted. There never was any mention of Real Presence. When the invitation was given for visitors to partake, he minister invited all who know Jesus to partake and explained that they use grape juice as a symbol of wine.
Click to expand...
If the pastor did things the orthodox way , he spoke the verba, the words of institution. In those words, we her Christ tell us that, “this (bread) is my body…”, etc.
Without the words spoken by the pastor, there is no sacrament.
 
Grape Juice being a symbol of wine does not equate to the Eucharist being a symbol for body and blood.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top