R
ricmat
Guest
So you offered up an example of something that wasn’t an opposite, in order to prove that “both can be true even though they are opposites.”
Good luck with that.
- Status
Good luck with that.
B
buffalo
Guest
I have come to the conclusion that StA is speaking another language. It is very difficult to communicate in a forthright manner.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
What’s not forthright about the eucharist?I have come to the conclusion that StA is speaking another language. It is very difficult to communicate in a forthright manner.
R
ricmat
Guest
You should quit digging before there is no ladder long enough to get you out.
B
buffalo
Guest
See what I mean? - I was just speaking generally.
E
edwest2
Guest
Just an observation. The pattern goes like this:
Block of text.
Block of text.
Final block of text.
The final block which StA copies and writes: “Quite right.” or “I agree.” As if the the other two blocks don’t exist.
I think the mistake made repeatedly here is to put God into the invisible faith category and to exclude Him from the reality we experience with our senses. But God knows the depth of our disbelief, which includes some Catholics. Is it beyond God’s ability to impress upon us the fact of His real presence in what we call reality? No. He has given visible signs in our reality as to His real, actual presence in the Eucharist.
catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0610fea1.asp
Those who propose a God who only existed 2,000 years ago or exists only as a belief or as an invisible entity, need to be reminded of the living God who can make Himself very tangible to us. The miracles we still experience, though ignored by the mass media, again speak to His power today, in a tangible way.
God bless,
Ed
Block of text.
Block of text.
Final block of text.
The final block which StA copies and writes: “Quite right.” or “I agree.” As if the the other two blocks don’t exist.
I think the mistake made repeatedly here is to put God into the invisible faith category and to exclude Him from the reality we experience with our senses. But God knows the depth of our disbelief, which includes some Catholics. Is it beyond God’s ability to impress upon us the fact of His real presence in what we call reality? No. He has given visible signs in our reality as to His real, actual presence in the Eucharist.
catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0610fea1.asp
Those who propose a God who only existed 2,000 years ago or exists only as a belief or as an invisible entity, need to be reminded of the living God who can make Himself very tangible to us. The miracles we still experience, though ignored by the mass media, again speak to His power today, in a tangible way.
God bless,
Ed
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Excellent point!
E
edwest2
Guest
See! There it is again!
Ed
Ed
A
ALISANDRO
Guest
.
Hi ricmat, this all sounds so terribly intellectual, but it need not be so. All that needs to be done here is to accept the hypothesis that Christ “is” in the Eucharist for those who choose to believe that it is so. For the rest, with or without the presence of Christ, it remains a symbolic acceptance of His supreme sacrifice. Christian regards, ALISANDRO.
G
grannymh
Guest
Regarding your comment about a theological theory – I do know that some of the other Christian religions have a “theory”. However, It is helpful to know that the Catholic Church has doctrines about Adam and Eve which do not depend on CAF posts’ opinions.
G
grannymh
Guest
It sounds as if you are confusing elements with “accidents” or you may be confusing elements with "substantially present under the signs of bread.
Regarding Adam.
Did you know that there are Scripture references which connect the Salvific Act of Jesus Christ with Adam? The real sin in which the real Adam scorned his Creator is why the real Jesus exists as true God and true man. God loved us so much.
Blessings,
granny
John 3:16 & 17
S
StAnastasia
Guest
No, I’m not confusing them.
Of course – the evangelists and Paul were among the first theologians.
R
ricmat
Guest
You seem to be rejecting the concept of Truth.
The Truth is either that Christ is present in the Eucharist, or Christ is not present in the Eucharist. It does not depend on what I believe or what you believe. It is not a matter of wishful thinking making something so, or wishful thinking making it not so. Truth does not depend on us. Truth is.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
Being human is not the same is being Divine.
Jesus is human.
Jesus Christ is divine.
Aren’t those opposites?
A
ALISANDRO
Guest
.
Good point ricmat, but no, I’m not rejecting the concept of Truth. Neither am I saying, “Don’t let the truth get in the way of a good story”. I’m merely posing the question, if I partake of the Eucharist (Communion) in a church of a denomination other than Catholic, am I still (in your eyes) partaking of the body and blood of our Lord, seeing that I do not subscribe to the Catholic doctrine of "Transubstanciation? Does my unbelief make your “truth” null and void? To put it another way, does my not believing in that doctrine affect the validity of the doctrine in the eyes of the Catholic Church? I am certainly not rejecting the concept of Truth seeing that this so-called truth is peculiar to the Catholic Church.
Christian regards, ALISANDRO.
T
Thing
Guest
No, it does not. Anglican Eucharist for example is not the flesh and blood of Christ, nor do they say it is, and whatever you think will not change that fact. If your receive the eucharist in an Orthodox church your unbelief still will not change the truth, that their eucharist is the flesh and blood of Christ.
A
ALISANDRO
Guest
.
Hi Thing, thanks for your comment. I would however ask you to insert a few words into your last sentence, i.e. “…your unbelief still will not change the truth, that (their belief is that) their Eucharist is the flesh & blood of Christ.” In any case my questions were purely rhetorical, but thanks once again for your (name removed by moderator)ut.
Christian regards, ALISANDRO.
P.S. To the many readers of, and contributors to this stream, how did we manage to get from a discussion about “Many Adams and Eves?” to a discussion about the Eucharist?.
G
grannymh
Guest
Good question since it relates to the reality of Adam and Original Sin.
The Catholic Eucharist is Jesus Christ, substantially present under the signs of bread. This existence is an objective truth in that it does not depend on verification by anyone’s belief. In other words, you would be receiving Jesus Christ substantially present under the signs of bread. Not subscribing to the Catholic Doctrine of Transubstantiation does not change one thing about the Catholic Eucharist.
No.
No.
People do consider Transubstantiation a concept. With or without a concept, from God’s point of view, the Second Person of The Blessed Trinity is substantially present under the signs of bread, i.e., the Catholic Eucharist.
Relationship to Adam.
“For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead came also through a human being. For just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life, but each one in proper order: Christ the first fruits; then, at His coming, those who belong to Christ; then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to His God and Father, when He has destroyed every sovereignty and every authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.” (1 Corinthians, Chapter 15, V. The Resurrection)
“In conclusion, just as through one transgression condemnation came upon all, so through one righteous act acquittal and life came to all.” (Romans, Chapter 5)
Life continues to come to us as Jesus Christ, true God and true man, continues to reign truly present in the Catholic Eucharist.
Blessings,
granny
Catholic teaching **regarding Adam and Eve and Original Sin **is found in the
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, ISBN: 1-57455-109-4
Paragraphs 355-421.
The good news of Jesus Christ follows in Paragraph 422, etc.
One can put paragraph numbers and topics such as Adam, etc. in the Catechism’s search bar in link www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
A
ALISANDRO
Guest
.
Hello grannymh, thank you for taking the trouble to answer my questions, but as I said to Thing in my last post, all of the questions were rhetorical, ie I already knew the answers. However, that does not detract from your sterling effort in answering them.
Christian regards, ALISANDRO.
G
grannymh
Guest
Rhetorical or not. The questions have been asked off CAF. Plus, I am willing to bet that guests on CAF have similar questions.
What is your opinion about the relationship to Adam?
Blessings,
granny
Spring is God’s message of faith in the future
- Status