Leviticus and the Eucharist

  • Thread starter Thread starter Reformed_Rob
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well allright. One time when I was reading that, what you are saying entered into my mind. You set it forth pretty clearly, clearer than I could have worded it certainly.

It seems so weird, an odd topic of discussion. But I think that another partner key is also understanding that Christ is not a mere human, fully human yes, but also fully God incarnate! Wow@!!

So, that certainly changes things. Like Cyril of Jerusalem (I think that’s who I’m remembering) argued against Nestorius in his letters that are included in the documents of Ephesus’ Council, 431 I think, that if Christ was merely man, like Nestorius was saying, then in the Eucharist it is the flesh and blood of a mere man we are consuming. Obviously not an appealing doctrine. Certainly not worthy the “cult of adoration” which is and has been considered due to the Eucharist.

Ok, so thanks for the discussion. I’m still after a better way of answering that charge, but I see that you have it pretty goodly answered.

hmmm…:hmmm:

ok… Makes you (me?) want the Eucharistist… thanx
 
From my meditations–not from anyone’s teaching:

I’ve always thought that the blood restriction, which is equated with life, of the Old Covenant was related to the Tree of Life. God placed the cherubim at the gate of Eden to keep man from eating of the Tree of Life while in a state of original sin because our death would then be eternal.

Thus not being able to drink/eat blood represented our spiritual death, and also proved the importance and utter trancendance of the Blood God would give us to drink in the New Covenant. God kept telling us that He didn’t want or need our ineffective sacrifices–we needed them to remind us from Whom all good things come.

Once Christ opened the gates of Heaven for us, the Body and Blood of the Lamb became the sap of the vine which feeds the branches and allows us to put on Christ, decreasing so that He can increase in us. The symbolism of the Mass is so awesome. The Body and Blood are first presented separately, which is a sign of human death, but then they are mingled before Communion, a sign of the resurrected Christ being eaten by us so that we can become What we eat.

So the Cross is truly the Tree of Life which allows us to eat the Sacrifice that continues for all time, just as the Jews often ate the thanksgiving sacrifice in the Old Testament. Dining with God was seen by the Jews as a symbol of unity with Him ever since the first Todah meal which took place with the 70 elders dining with God on Mt. Sinai.

Hence the Mass is both Sacrifice and Meal just as the todah and thanksgiving offerings were.

This is probably too meditative to be useful to you, but I have always been fascinated by all of this, and am enthralled as I take part in it at every Mass.

In Christ’s peace and joy,

Robin L. in TX
 
Well allright. One time when I was reading that, what you are saying entered into my mind. You set it forth pretty clearly, clearer than I could have worded it certainly.

It seems so weird, an odd topic of discussion. But I think that another partner key is also understanding that Christ is not a mere human, fully human yes, but also fully God incarnate! Wow@!!

So, that certainly changes things. Like Cyril of Jerusalem (I think that’s who I’m remembering) argued against Nestorius in his letters that are included in the documents of Ephesus’ Council, 431 I think, that if Christ was merely man, like Nestorius was saying, then in the Eucharist it is the flesh and blood of a mere man we are consuming. Obviously not an appealing doctrine. Certainly not worthy the “cult of adoration” which is and has been considered due to the Eucharist.

Ok, so thanks for the discussion. I’m still after a better way of answering that charge, but I see that you have it pretty goodly answered.

hmmm…:hmmm:

ok… Makes you (me?) want the Eucharistist… thanx
 
Hi Reformed Rob,

at first I was not sure what you were looking for with your question and so I had not given it a lot of thought. There have been some really good answers that have been given and I am not sure that I can match some of them.

Yes, I have a copy of Mark Shea’s book in front of me, and so I will also familiarize myself with what he is saying as I attempt to make further responses.

Anyway, thinking about the passages that you have given and the Protestant objections on “blood” and cannibalism, I am inclined to look at this from the point of view of the words of Jesus in John Chapter 6, and then marry these up with what is written in Leviticus etc. I feel that the key word is not “blood” but LIFE. What is meant by life?
 
A previous poster has looked at this question from the point of view of the Tree of Life. It really is a fantastic analogy to make and certainly gives plenty of room for further thought.

I am thinking along the same lines but I see it more in line with how the Jews understand the word “life”. Also, I am looking at the meaning of this word from the “spiritual” point of view. How should we understand the word “life” as it is used in the Scripture?

As has already been pointed out, the Israelites were forbidden to eat the blood of animals because that blood contained the lifeforce of the animal.

The life that we experience spiritually is that Life that brings us closer to God. It is truly “Life in the Spirit”. How do we receive this life? Through the Eucharist. This is what I believe Jesus is explaining in John Chapter 6 - that we must eat His Body and drink His Blood, if we want to have that spiritual Life within us - a Life that will bring us closer and closer to God (unless of course we commit sin and turn our backs on God).

Is this making any sense? I am still working on this thought process and thought I would put it forward anyway.

Maggie
 
40.png
MaggieOH:
The life that we experience spiritually is that Life that brings us closer to God. It is truly “Life in the Spirit”. How do we receive this life? Through the Eucharist. This is what I believe Jesus is explaining in John Chapter 6 - that we must eat His Body and drink His Blood, if we want to have that spiritual Life within us - a Life that will bring us closer and closer to God (unless of course we commit sin and turn our backs on God).

Is this making any sense? I am still working on this thought process and thought I would put it forward anyway.

Maggie
Click to expand...
Thanks Maggie!

Yeah, that helps. Everything else was helpful too, but I guess you could say that what you said served to tie it all together for me and was really helpful!

Is that just what you think, of is it Church teaching? Just thought I’d ask. It certainly was helpful.

Rob
 
Reformed Rob:
Thanks Maggie!

Yeah, that helps. Everything else was helpful too, but I guess you could say that what you said served to tie it all together for me and was really helpful!
Code: 
Is that just what you think, of is it Church teaching?  Just thought I'd ask.  It certainly was helpful.
Rob
Click to expand...
I cannot say for certain that it is Church teaching. It is what I saw in the texts cited, and then I realised how these texts tie in with John Chapter 6. My original thought related to the fact that I had been told by a Jewish woman, that the reason for forbidding the eating of drinking of blood from animals, is that blood is considered to be the life of the animal or the person. It was from there that I saw how the texts themselves flow until one reaches John’s Gospel and the Eucharistic discourse in Chapter 6, as well as the tie in with the Last Supper in all of the Gospels. In the Eucharistic discourse Jesus speaks of hiself as being "The Bread of Life’

Maggie
 
:hmmm: So let’s look at it another way, what say?

Wasn’t it Peter that had the dream of all the ‘unclean’ animals that he was raised not to eat and in his dream he was told to eat of it? The lesson there being that the old laws did not apply any longer and he could now partake in these things?

Someone tell me that I’m not making this up.

Blessings
 
SusanG said:
:hmmm: So let’s look at it another way, what say?

Wasn’t it Peter that had the dream of all the ‘unclean’ animals that he was raised not to eat and in his dream he was told to eat of it? The lesson there being that the old laws did not apply any longer and he could now partake in these things?

Someone tell me that I’m not making this up.

Blessings
Click to expand...

However, the pagans were asked to refrain from partaking in the blood of animals

Maggie
 
SusanG said:
:hmmm: So let’s look at it another way, what say?

Wasn’t it Peter that had the dream of all the ‘unclean’ animals that he was raised not to eat and in his dream he was told to eat of it? The lesson there being that the old laws did not apply any longer and he could now partake in these things?

Someone tell me that I’m not making this up.

Blessings
Click to expand...

I think that, even though the food laws in general were abrogated or whatever, that wouldn’t mean that it’s now ok to eat/drink blood.

Not that a “Rare” steak is in itself sinful, but I think that drinking blood is morally apprehensive, and pagan in origin.

Of course, if I were Catholic, I’d make the distinction yall make for the Eucharist, and say that it’s not just merely human blood, but at the same time “blood of God”. So it’s different.

So yeah, we’re not like Muslims who refrain from pork and like those really conservative Jews that still abide by the OT dietary laws. But still, we don’t eat flesh that still has blood, or eat baby sheep (or lamb or whatever) that were cooked in their mama’s milk!

However, I understand that there’s a case to be made for “God’s diet” being a really healthy way to eat. But there’s more than just a digestive way to looking at it. There’s also spiritual meaning to the food laws.
 
In additioin to that, eating someone’s flesh “symbolically” is like disrespctful, Biblically speaking. I saw a list of passages referring to that, and it was pretty convincing. I’ll have to find that, I think it was on these forums.
Click to expand...
I’m curious about the passages, please post if you do happen to find them.
 
Reformed Rob:
Ok,

Deureronomy 12:23
Only be sure to not eat the blood, for the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh.

So, what do you say? I’m willing and open to hear what you have to say. Bring it!
Click to expand...
Amazing how the answer often exists within the question.

Through prayer, meditation, and scripture study the Lord has lead me to what most of the posters have been revealing.

Robin L’s post nearly blew me away!

I have seen the correlation in scripture between people and trees. (Ps 1:3) It just never registered with me the correlation between Jesus and the Tree of Life in relation to the Eucharist.

Thank you.

“The Lord is my chosen portion and my cup; thou holdest my lot.”(Ps16:5)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top