John 6 and Eucharist?

[Mickey]

bene7:

God performs a miracle to glorifiy Himself. Hence in some capacity it must be sensed by man. This cannot be done with what Catholicism claims about its “Eucharist.” At the time of the supposed transformation into the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ you cannot see, hear, feel, smell, or even taste that a change had occurred.

For some, the fact that Jesus was fully human and fully divine might be difficult to believe–yet you believe it.

For some, the virgin birth might be difficult to believe–yet you believe it.

For some, the resurrection might be difficult to believe–yet you believe it.

For some, the ascension might be difficult to believe–yet you believe it.

Jesus says: For my flesh is food INDEED, and my blood is
drink** INDEED**.

INDEED: Without a doubt; certainly; In fact; reality

But you do not believe this.

 

[Mickey]

sandusky:

Oh yes, the “God is outside the constraints of time” argument. Wake up man; it is logically impossible for the mass to be the same sacrifice as that of Calvary.

Are you saying that God is limited by temporal constraints?

 

[Kay_Cee]

bene7:

The Son humbled Himself and took on human form - bodily. Material in this created world HAS definite boundaries, and to this Christ was/is, in bodily form, limited. Otherwise He did not become, nor is He now, a true man, but was from the time of His incarnation - a Superman. He was not one of us. Not truly human. But the truth is, the Son took on true humanity in bodily form. He took on humanity but His body did not take on Divinity, nor any attributes of Divinty (i.e., omnipresence). A physical, human, material body can be in only ONE place at a time. Otherwise it can no longer be defined as human and certainly not a part of this created, material universe. But is actually spirit and the material is merely an illusion. This is true Gnosticism.

I said that *God *is not limited by time and space. Jesus performed miracles from a distance, didn’t he? (Matthew 8:5-13 and John 4:46-54) He was not limited by where His physical body was because He is both human and divine. He is a divine human being. The limitations you talk about are true for non-divine human beings. Someone could just as easily say that a “physical, human, material body” could not walk on water and that one who did “can no longer be defined as human.”

Kay Cee, not even angels which ARE spirits possess the attribute of omnipresence.

Blessings,
Bene

I never discussed angels in my argument, and I certainly never claimed they are omniprescent.

 

[Mickey]

After the disciples had eaten the new and holy Bread, and when they understood by faith that they had eaten of Christ’s body, Christ went on to explain and to give them the whole Sacrament. He took and mixed a cup of wine. The He blessed it, and signed it, and made it holy, declaring that it was His own Blood, which was about to be poured out. …Christ commanded them to drink, and He explained to them that the cup which they were drinking was His own Blood: 'This is truly My Blood, which is shed for all of you. Take, all of you, drink of this, because it is a new covenant in My Blood, As you have seen Me do, do you also in My memory. Whenever you are gathered together in My name in Churches everywhere, do what I have done, in memory of Me. Eat My Body, and drink My Blood, a covenant new and old.
St. Ephraim Of Syria, “Homilies” 4,6 ca. 350 A.D.

 

[Mickey]

Cease not to pray and plead for me when you draw down the Word by your word, when in an unbloody cutting you cut the Body and Blood of the Lord, using your voice for a sword.
St. Gregory Nanzianzen, “Letter to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium” [171] ca. 383 A.D.

 

[Mickey]

Contemplate therefore the Bread and Wine not as bare elements, for they are, according to the Lord’s declaration, the Body and Blood of Christ; for though sense suggests this to thee, let faith establish thee. Judge not the matter from taste, but from faith be fully assured without misgiving, that thou hast been vouchsafed the Body and Blood of Christ.
St. Cyril Of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures [22 (Mystagogic 4), 6]

 

[Mickey]

Rightly then, do we believe that the bread consecrated by the word of God has been made over into the Body of God the Word. For that Body was, as to its potency bread; but it has been consecrated by the lodging there of the Word, who pitched His tent in the flesh.
St. Gregory Of Nyssa, "The Great Catechism [37: 9-13]

 

[Mickey]

The Word is everything to a child: both Father and Mother, both Instructor and Nurse. ‘Eat My Flesh,’ He says, ‘and drink My Blood.’ The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients. He delivers over His Flesh, and pours out His Blood; and nothing is lacking for the growth of His children. O incredible mystery!
St. Clement Of Alexandria, “The Instructor of the Children” [1,6,41,3] ante 202 A.D.

 

[Mickey]

When we speak of the reality of Christ’s nature being in us, we would be speaking foolishly and impiously - had we not learned it from Him. For He Himself says: ‘My Flesh is truly Food, and My Blood is truly Drink. He that eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood will remain in Me and I in him.’ As to the reality of His Flesh and Blood, there is no room left for doubt, because now, both by the declaration of the Lord Himself and by our own faith, it is truly the Flesh and it is truly Blood. And These Elements bring it about, when taken and consumed, that we are in Christ and Christ is in us. Is this not true? Let those who deny that Jesus Christ is true God be free to find these things untrue. But He Himself is in us through the flesh and we are in Him, while that which we are with Him is in God.
**St. Hilary Of Poiters, “The Trinity” [8,14] inter 356-359 A.D. **

 

[Mickey]

**You ought to know what you have received, what you are going to receive, and what you ought to receive daily. That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Body of Christ. The chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Blood of Christ. **
**St Augustine, “Sermons”, [227, 21] **

 

[Mickey]

**You perhaps say: ‘My bread is usual.’ But the bread is bread before the words of the sacraments; when consecration has been added, from bread it becomes the flesh of Christ. So let us confirm this, how it is possible that what is bread is the body of Christ. By what words, then, is the consecration and by whose expressions? By those of the Lord Jesus. For all the rest that are said in the preceding are said by the priest: praise to God, prayer is offered, there is a petition for the people, for kings, for the rest. When it comes to performing a venerable sacrament, then the priest uses not his own expressions, but he uses the expressions of Christ. Thus the expression of Christ performs this sacrament. **
St. Ambrose Of Milan, “The Sacraments” Book 4, Ch.4:14.

---

---

 

[Mickey]

**[Christ] has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own Blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own Body, from which he gives increase to our bodies. **
St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, 180 A.D.

 

[Mickey]

**You shall see the Levites bringing loaves and a cup of wine, and placing them on the table. So long as the prayers of supplication and entreaties have not been made, there is only bread and wine. But after the great and wonderful prayers have been completed, then the bread is become the Body, and the wine the Blood, of our Lord Jesus Christ… Let us approach the celebration of the mysteries. This bread and this wine, so long as the prayers and supplications have not taken place, remain simply what they are. But after the great prayers and holy supplications have been sent forth, the Word comes down into the bread and wine – and thus is His Body confected. **
**ST. ATHANASIUS (c. 295 - 373 A.D.) (Sermon to the Newly Baptized, from Eutyches) **

 

[AquinasXVI]

EXCELLENT WORK MICKEY!!!

Sandusky:

Now, let’s get your side of historical writing that proves the Holy Eucharist as symbolic.

in XT.

 

[ncgolf]

Thanks, Mickey,

That’s what I was looking for. Our faith in the Eucharist comes from the Bible but is also supported and explained even further by great Catholic saints.

Reginald, who was Thomas Aquinas’s confessor, told of what he saw one morning. Thomas was laying prostrate on the floor in front of the Blessed Sacrament. Reginald hears a voice eminating from the Blessed Sacrament saying, “Thomas, you have written well of me. What would like as your reward.” Thomas’s respsonse was, “Only you, Lord.”

Aquinas’s Treatise on the Eucharist and his writings in the Summa Theoglica are some of the best around, but this is what Thomas said of his work as he was granted a vision of God’s glory shortly before he died. “All of what I have written is straw.”

Unfortunately, if Thomas Aquinas’s words are inadequate, where does it put ours.

I still want to see what authors support the non true presence viewpoint and what they have to say. These would have to be men or women writing at somewhat the same level as Aquinas, Ignatius or some of those listed by Mickey.

I await the list.

 

[mercygate]

sandusky:

mercygate from your post #273

mercygate, your above interpretation is an exquisite example of eisegetical reasoning.

Philthy’s logical fallacy was begging the question.

Your logical fallacy is Circulus in demonstrando, or *Circular reasoning *

Circular? Moving from the merely material realm toward the sacramental reality is not circular. My “eisegesis” certainly connects this sequence of pericopes more soundly than the idea that the walking on water is a transposed resurrection narrative or that it is just stuck in there for no particular reason.

IOW, you have assumed as your premise, the conclusion you wish to reach.

That is revealed by the internal inconsistency within your argument, in that, it is not the flesh that is acting strangely, and being multiplied, but the bread.

In order for your argument to be consistent, I would expect to see a loaf of bread walking across the water, and not the Lord.

Why?

From your post #333

I don’t mind testy; I too can get testy.

I do mind testiness, especially my own.

Your statements above are also a logical fallacy known as a bunch of baloney. The book of Revelation is certainly NOT the Mass, nor does it have anything to do with the Mass.

This response is entirely understandable, considering your perspective.

The blood of the covenant is Christ’s blood shed on the Cross; it is not the Eucharist.

For a Catholic, it is clearly both. In Hebrews 9, Paul sets up the discussion in terms of discusses “ordinances of divine service” and emphasizes “the blood of the covenant” for the forgiveness of sins under the old covenant. Then in chapter 10 he admonishes that we must not “forsake the assembling of ourselves together as is the habit of some” (in verse 25). We understand this to mean assembling of ourselves together for worship. He then goes on in verses 28-29 to amplify the new covenant over the old, using the same phrase as in chapter 9: “blood of the covenant”: He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? [KJV]

It makes perfect sense to connect this with the Eucharist. The blood of Calvary would not likely have been held “unholy” (profane, ordinary – depending on the translation) by any Christian. Tlhis warning makes full sense only if it refers to the Eucharist. I emphasize again that the only time Jesus uses the word “covenant” is for the cup at the Last Supper.

I am certain that there is no mention of the Lamb that was slain on the altar of heaven. If memory serves me, there are no acts of slaying anything in heaven contained in Revelation.

I apologize for being unclear. Since I did not put that phrase in quotation marks, I did not expect anybody familiar with Scripture to treat it as a direct quotation. (I was also picturing *The Adoration of the Lamb *from the Ghent altarpiece.) The Lamb, however you read that passage, can be none other than the “passover sacrificed for us.” It stands “as though slain” because the once-slain Christ “stands.”

Revelation is the description of the final 7 years of human history; it is not the Mass.

We understand your position in that Revelation cannot exemplify the Mass for you since you reject it a priori. We find this view to be limited. To a Catholic, the imagery of the Mass in Revelation is like an unsealed book, to use an apt expression.

 

[Philthy]

bene7:

Mercy, if we succumb to your definition of “mystery” then anyone can introduce any time an unreasonable doctrine into the Christian faith and say, don’t worry about it, it’s a “mystery.”

Actully, that happens all the time - only it isn’t cleverly disguised as a “mystery”, its matter-of factly stated as simply “the Word of God”. I say be careful bene, you are leading down the road of Tradition - and you won’t like where it takes you if want to stay put theologically. The potential abuse that you describe is only possible in a vacuum of personal interpretations devoid of history, historical context, and a divinely guided authority to expose such deviations from the faith. As with all topics upon which we endeavor to discuss, all must begin and end - ultimately - with authority. You will claim your authority as the Bible, but what you truly mean your authority to be is the interpretation of the Bible which YOU feel most accurately conveys its Truth. It is certainly a very reasonable approach - if one were to ignore the observable, historical reality that it leads to multiple, contradictory “truths”, and that most of those truths lack the support of reliable witnesses throughout the history of the Church.
In short, your concern of invented doctrine by “anyone” is not possible in the Catholic Church.

bene7:

We’re always better off adhereing to Biblical definitions. God knows what He’s talking about.How’s this, “Do this *‘in recognition’ *of Me.”
Blessings,
Bene

Biblical definitions? What does that mean? The bible does not provide definitions. It assumes the reader to be familiar with the full context of where, when and to whom something was said. That requires historical context which may or may not be provided in Scripture. AaronI has attempted to illuminate this concept to you in reference to the ZIKKARON which you appear to be avoiding IMHO. And with good reason, the JEWISH concept of “in memory of” is completely different than your own(or mine). That changes the entire discussion of the Eucharist radically, which, I suppose, is the reason you prefer not to discuss it. Just the slightest examination of the issue will reveal that our 21st century, western concept of “rememberance” is barely a shadow of the reality understood by the Apostles. The only question that remains is which one is the “biblical” definition? The modern one, which ignores the historico-cultural context of the term, or the original one which embraces all of that cultural and historical fullness?

Phil

 

[mikeledes]

The notion that a supernatural event (i.e. miracles, etc) must be seen is a faulty premise. The Holy Spirit descended on Jesus in the form of a dove. For the unbeliver, it would have been simply a dove. For the spiritual person, they would have known that the dove is the Holy Spirit, despite the fact that what was SEEN did not make this fact obvious. We know that the Bread and the Wine turn into the body and blood of Christ because Jesus told us so. I don’t need to see anything to believe that transubstantiation occurs. Remember, blessed is he who believes without seeing.

God Bless

 

[NotWorthy]

Sandusky:

		 				Your statements above are also a logical fallacy known as *a bunch of baloney*. The book of Revelation is certainly NOT the Mass, nor does it have anything to do with the Mass.

Sunday worship - ***I was caught up in spirit on the Lord’s Day …***1:10

**A high priest**                          -  ***one like a son of man, wearing an ankle-length robe, with a gold sash around his chest***.            1:13

**An altar**                                  -  ***"Come and measure the temple of God and the altar, and count those who are worshiping in it."*** 11:1; 8:3-4; 14:18;

**Vestments - **                               ***They stood before the throne … wearing white robes and holding palms … ***7:9; 1:13; 4:4; 6:11; 15:6; 19:13-14

**Priests ("presbyteroi") - ** ***Surrounding the throne I saw twenty-four other thrones on which twenty-four elders sat, dressed in white garments and with gold crowns on their heads. ***4:4; 11:16; 14:3; 19:4

**Consecrated celibacy** -  ***These are they who were not defiled with women; they are virgins and … follow the Lamb wherever he goes***. 14:4

**The tabernacle (tent)**  ***- The temple that is the heavenly tent of testimony …*** 15:5

**Lampstands (Menorah)**  - … ***when I turned, I saw seven gold lampstands*** 1:12; 2:5

**Incense - **                                   ***… gold bowls filled with incense, which are the prayers of the holy ones***. 5:8; 8:3-5

**Chalices**                                   ***- One of the four living creatures gave the seven angels seven gold bowls …*** 15:7; 16:1; 21:9

**The Sign of the Cross   - *… until we put the seal on the foreheads of the servants***** ("tau")**                                    *** of our God ***7:3; 14:1; 22:4

**The Gloria**                              - ***and the song of the Lamb: "Great and wonderful are your works, Lord God almighty. … For you alone are holy. All the nations will come and worship before you, for your righteous acts have been revealed***." 15:3-4

**The Alleluia**                            ***- …a great multitude in heaven, saying: "Alleluia! Salvation, glory, and might belong to our God***."19:1,3,4,6

**Lift up your hearts**  ***- Then they heard a loud voice from heaven say to them, "Come up here."*** 11:12

**The Amen**                                ***- The twenty-four elders … worshiped God who sat on the throne, saying, "Amen. Alleluia***." 19:4; 22:21

**The Lamb of God**  - ***Then I saw standing in the midst of the throne … a Lamb that seemed to have been slain.*** 5:6 and throughout

**Intercession of angels              ****and saints**** -   *I saw underneath the altar the souls of those who had*** ***been slaughtered … cried out in a loud voice, "How long will it be, holy and true master, before you sit in judgment and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth***?" 8:3-4; 5:8; 6:9-10

**Antiphonal chant**  - ***They cried out in a loud voice: "Salvation comes from our God, who is seated on the throne, and from the Lamb" … "Amen. Blessing and glory, wisdom and thanksgiving, honor, power, and might be to our God forever and ever. Amen.***" 4:8-11; 5:9-14; 7:10-12; 18:1-8

**Silent contemplation**              - ***… there was silence in heaven for about half an hour.*** 8:1

**God's faithful singing ****praise****   *- They sang a new hymn: "Worthy are you … for you were****** slain and with your blood you purchased for God those from every tribe … people and nation***. 4:8; 5:9; 14:3; 15:3

**Kneeling before Christ**             - ***When I caught sight of him, I fell down at his feet as though dead***. 1:17; 4:10

Notworthy

 

[NotWorthy]

As we sing, “*Holy, holy, holy Lord, God of power and might”, *we share inJohn’s vision. In chapter 4 of Revelations, he witnessed four living creatures day and night never ceasing to sing, “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty” (Rev. 4:8).

When the priest holds up the consecrated host and says, “This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Happy are those who are called to his supper”, he is repeating those words said in Chapter 19, hearing the mighty voice of a great multitude in heaven singing, “Hallelujah!” and announcing the wedding supper of the Lamb.

Our Catechism understands the connection between the Mass and the Apocalypse: “The Book of Revelation of St John, read in the Church’s liturgy, first reveals to us, ‘A throne stood in heaven, with one seated on the throne’… ‘the Lord God’ (Rev. 4:2, 8). It then shows the Lamb, ‘standing as though it had been slain’ (Rev. 5:6): Christ crucified and risen, the one high priest of the true sanctuary, the same one ‘who offers and is offered, who gives and is given.’ Finally, it presents the ‘river of the water of life… flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb,’ one of the most beautiful symbols of the Holy Spirit (Rev. 22:1)” (Cat. no. 1137).

From the opening verses of the book, it is clear that the Church’s liturgy is the proper context for the Apocalypse. “Blessed is he who reads aloud the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear” (Rev. 1:3). The “one who reads” is the lector and “those who hear” refer to the congregation.

At the end of the seven letters, Jesus says, “Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any one hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me” (Rev. 3:20). This is easily recognizeable as a reference to the Eucharist.

“Hallel,” means “praise.” It is from this word that we get our English word, “Hallelujah” or “Alleluia.” “Yah,” the short form in Hebrew for God’s name “Yahweh” when combined with Hallel means, “praise God.” After the persecutors of God’s people are judged in Rev. 17-18, John sees the angels and saints at a meal celebrated in the heavenly Mt. Zion, where they sing “Hallelujah!” Just as the Passover meal was celebrated with the drinking of the seder cups and the singing of the “Hallel” Psalms, Revelation depicts a meal that is celebrated after the “cups” are poured out (Rev. 16-17) and after the saints sing “Hallelujah” (Rev. 19:1-9). John thus sees the Eucharist as the New Passover celebrated in the heavenly Promised Land.

Notworthy