Real Presence Apologetics

[EvangelCatholic]

I have to rest my case EvangelCatholic; the websites you provided do not reveal any Pope or bishop speaking the ecumenical during the dialogue with a Lutheran theologian.

The Ecumenical work of the Catholic Church and it’s wording from the U.S Catholic bishop’s is spoken in general terms that include the Orthodox and all Christians.

I was hoping you could provide a Pope or bishop using ecumenical in the context you have been using the term.

Peace be with you

You can lead a horse to water but your can’t make him drink.

Do you normally resist every ounce of evidence if the topic bothers you?

 

[benjohnson]

You can lead a horse to water but your can’t make him drink.

Do you normally resist every ounce of evidence if the topic bothers you?

That’s not quite fair - our Catholic friends allow for a lot of leeway in conjecture, but form the Catholic standpoint, we’ll know they’re in communion with Lutherans when they are actually in communion with us officially.

Until then, it’s all speculation and nice words. Frankly, I respect that they’re even willing to dialog with Lutherans given that our adherence to the orthodox faith has been rather wanting lately.

 

[steido01]

That’s not quite fair - our Catholic friends allow for a lot of leeway in conjecture, but form the Catholic standpoint, we’ll know they’re in communion with Lutherans when they are actually in communion with us officially.

Until then, it’s all speculation and nice words. Frankly, I respect that they’re even willing to dialog with Lutherans given that our adherence to the orthodox faith has been rather wanting lately.

Agreed. I’d only add that it’s probably best if we let Roman Catholics explain their church rather than making conjecture based on non-binding dialogue. I know we appreciate being afforded the same courtesy.

P.S.- Gabe, thank you for your posts. You’ve given me quite a bit to chew.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

You can lead a horse to water but your can’t make him drink.

Do you normally resist every ounce of evidence if the topic bothers you?

Yes I apologize for the sarcasm. But the word “ecumenical” is used repeatedly in the Lutheran-Catholic Dialogue. Perhaps this article can shed light on the “amazing” developments of these talks.
ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/there-should-be-more-focus-lutherancatholic-agreements

 

[Isaiah45_9]

You can lead a horse to water but your can’t make him drink.

In this case, the horse knows the water is not drinkable.

 

[Bernard_Lyons]

Bernard; I see no point in your argument here? No matter what language Jesus spoke in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, Latin? the latter were the most used languages spoken during His ministry when Jesus walked the earth.

We Know for Jesus gave “Thanks” in what ever language you see fit. When Jesus spoke the Word “thanks, or thanksgiving”, all the other languages of his time repeated it, from Latin the Word Eucharist comes from the Word Jesus spoke His thanks, or thanksgiving.\QUOTE]

(1)

Greek was the original language of the New Testament. It is therefore a reliable source when referencing the actual meaning of the words recorded.( used as such by Bernard of Clairvaux ,Augustine ect.)
In my post #112 the word eucharisteo is looked at in the context of the Lord’ Supper,so I am not just focusing on the Greek word meaning thanks.

As far as Sacrament which comes from “Oath”, is never a word that denotes an ordinance. You have confused “Rite” with “Sacrament”. Yes Jesus used the word “Oath”, and practiced the sacramental rites of the Old Covenant in order to fulfill them.

A Play on words should never be a reason for your faith. The practice and works from what Jesus said and did, reveals our Catholic faith from our practice and works

Sacrament comes from the word “sacramentum”, which is a sworn oath of allegiance that changes the person’s character.\QUOTE]

(2)

As a former Roman Catholic myself ,please allow me to suggest to you ,that in my using the word " sacraments" directly in relation to the (seven ) priestly functions provided to the Catholic faithful: Baptism and the Eucharist ( Mass) being prime examples,I am not being unreasonable .

I would agree that the word " sacramentum" has connection to that which is a sworn oath of allegiance.

But the word also has strong connections with both the Greek word " mysterion “and it has a deeper association in the practice of certain “rites”.
This is well documented and in the “Encyclopaedia Britannica,” under the word” Sacraments", one will find:

“When Sacramentum was adopted as an ordinance by the early Christian church in the 3rd century,the Latin word sacer(‘holy’) was brought into conjunction with the Greek word mysterion. (” secret rite") Sacramentum was thus given a sacred mysterious significance that indicated a spiritual potency. The power was transmitted through material instruments and vehicles viewed as channels of devine grace and as benefits in ritual observances instituted by Christ"

So I am not just playing with words .But you are correct in this respect ,in my opinion my faith is built upon the original meaning go the Greek original.

For: " faith cometh by hearing and hearing the word of God" Rom10:17.

 

[Bernard_Lyons]

That’s not quite fair - our Catholic friends allow for a lot of leeway in conjecture, but form the Catholic standpoint, we’ll know they’re in communion with Lutherans when they are actually in communion with us officially.

Until then, it’s all speculation and nice words. Frankly, I respect that they’re even willing to dialog with Lutherans given that our adherence to the orthodox faith has been rather wanting lately.

As a great admirer of Martin Luther and how God ( I believe) revealed to him the great truths on" Justification by faith" ;and how these assertions made by Luther were made public and gathered great momentum throughout much of the world ;I would think none would doubt.

How is it then,that those who still hold onto his name can now claim to be so close to the communion that he claimed was contrary to his belief in " the Just shall live by faith? ("Hab4:2,Heb 10:38.)

It is my belief that Martin Luther would have rejected the idea that the justification was maintained or increased through the “sacrament” of the “Eucharist” .This is because his assertions were so strong in relation to justification being by grace alone ,and that through the preached Evangel.

I believe Martin Luther was still unclear in his thinking in regards to the “Lord’s Supper” but was this due to his focus and fervent desire to express to all :that men can be freely justified and that before God without doing anything to improve themselves as such; but by trusting in Christ Jesus as all their Justification,and that before an holy God.Referencing Rom4:5 eg.as his argument. " But to him that work etch not ,but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly,his faith is counted for righteousness."

If you then claim not just this mans name only ,but the same Spirit( he claimed ) that moved in him: where are your nails upon the door; or in these days upon the " posts"?

 

[Isaiah45_9]

As a great admirer of Martin Luther and how God ( I believe) revealed to him the great truths on" Justification by faith" ;and how these assertions made by Luther were made public and gathered great momentum throughout much of the world ;I would think none would doubt.

How is it then,that those who still hold onto his name can now claim to be so close to the communion that he claimed was contrary to his belief in " the Just shall live by faith? ("Hab4:2,Heb 10:38.)

It is my belief that Martin Luther would have rejected the idea that the justification was maintained or increased through the “sacrament” of the “Eucharist” .This is because his assertions were so strong in relation to justification being by grace alone ,and that through the preached Evangel.

I believe Martin Luther was still unclear in his thinking in regards to the “Lord’s Supper” but was this due to his focus and fervent desire to express to all :that men can be freely justified and that before God without doing anything to improve themselves as such; but by trusting in Christ Jesus as all their Justification,and that before an holy God.Referencing Rom4:5 eg.as his argument. " But to him that work etch not ,but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly,his faith is counted for righteousness."

If you then claim not just this mans name only ,but the same Spirit( he claimed ) that moved in him: where are your nails upon the door; or in these days upon the " posts"?

Luther’s Large Catechism:
The Sacrament of the Altar.

10] It is the Word (I say) which makes and distinguishes this Sacrament, so that it is not mere bread and wine, but is, and is called, the body and blood of Christ. For it is said: Accedat verbum ad elementum, et fit sacramentum. If the Word be joined to the element, it becomes a Sacrament. This saying of St. Augustine is so properly and so well put that he has scarcely said anything better. The Word must make a Sacrament of the element, else it remains a mere element. 11] Now, it is not the word or ordinance of a prince or emperor, but of the sublime Majesty, at whose feet all creatures should fall, and affirm it is as He says, and accept it with all reverence, fear, and humility.

15] Hence it is easy to reply to all manner of questions about which men are troubled at the present time, such as this one: Whether even a wicked priest can minister at, and dispense, the Sacrament, and whatever other questions like this there may be. 16] For here we conclude and say: Even though a knave takes or distributes the Sacrament, he receives the true Sacrament, that is, the true body and blood of Christ, just as truly as he who [receives or] administers it in the most worthy manner. For it is not founded upon the holiness of men, but upon the Word of God. And as no saint upon earth, yea, no angel in heaven, can make bread and wine to be the body and blood of Christ, so also can no one change or alter it, even though it be misused. 17] For the Word by which it became a Sacrament and was instituted does not become false because of the person or his unbelief. For He does not say: If you believe or are worthy, you receive My body and blood, but: Take, eat and drink; this is My body and blood. Likewise: Do this (namely, what I now do, institute, give, and bid you take). 18] That is as much as to say, No matter whether you are worthy or unworthy, you have here His body and blood by virtue of these words which are added to the bread and wine. 19] Only note and remember this well; for upon these words rest all our foundation, protection, and defense against all errors and deception that have ever come or may yet come.

And

I would rather have pure blood with the Pope, than drink mere wine with the Enthusiasts.

(Luther’s Works, 37, 317)

 

[JonNC]

=Bernard Lyons;11718554]As a great admirer of Martin Luther and how God ( I believe) revealed to him the great truths on" Justification by faith" ;and how these assertions made by Luther were made public and gathered great momentum throughout much of the world ;I would think none would doubt.

How is it then,that those who still hold onto his name can now claim to be so close to the communion that he claimed was contrary to his belief in " the Just shall live by faith? ("Hab4:2,Heb 10:38.)

It may be that we claim to be so close to Catholicism for three reasons, 1) we really have always been so, and/or 2) the claim is relative, meaning how close we are to Rome compared to most of Western non-Catholic Christianity, and most likely 3), that for the well-catechized Lutheran, the sacraments of Baptism, Absolution, and the Eucharist are so strong, so vital to our faith, that we could not even consider a move to a communion that rejects them.

It is my belief that Martin Luther would have rejected the idea that the justification was maintained or increased through the “sacrament” of the “Eucharist” .This is because his assertions were so strong in relation to justification being by grace alone ,and that through the preached Evangel.

**I believe Martin Luther was still unclear **in his thinking in regards to the “Lord’s Supper” but was this due to his focus and fervent desire to express to all :that men can be freely justified and that before God without doing anything to improve themselves as such; but by trusting in Christ Jesus as all their Justification,and that before an holy God.Referencing Rom4:5 eg.as his argument. " But to him that work etch not ,but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly,his faith is counted for righteousness."

The bolded is just patently wrong.
Luther was steadfast in the historic, scriptural belief in the real presence. So much so, this:

"Who, but the devil, has granted such license of wresting the words of the holy Scripture? Who ever read in the Scriptures, that my body is the same as the sign of my body? or, that is is the same as it signifies? What language in the world ever spoke so? It is only then the devil, that imposes upon us by these fanatical men. Not one of the Fathers of the Church, though so numerous, ever spoke as the Sacramentarians: not one of them ever said, It is only bread and wine; or, the body and blood of Christ is not there present.

Surely, it is not credible, nor possible, since they often speak, and repeat their sentiments, that they should never (if they thought so) not so much as once, say, or let slip these words: It is bread only; or the body of Christ is not there, especially it being of great importance, that men should not be deceived. Certainly, in so many Fathers, and in so many writings, the negative might at least be found in one of them, had they thought the body and blood of Christ were not really present: but they are all of them unanimous.

And

If five years ago D. Carlstadt, or anybody else, had been able to persuade me that there is nothing but bread and wine in the Sacrament, he would, I confess, have rendered me a great service. I have undergone severe struggles and have twisted and turned to get over it (belief in the Real Presence), because I was fully aware that it would have been the most severe blow which I could have dealt against Popery . . . . But I am in prison. I cannot escape, the text (‘This is my body’) is too powerful, and no words can make it mean anything else

Nothing unclear in this. It is the words, Christ’s words, that make the sacrament what it is, His true and substantial blood, given and shed for the remission of sin.

Jon

 

[rcwitness]

As a great admirer of Martin Luther and how God ( I believe) revealed to him the great truths on" Justification by faith" ;and how these assertions made by Luther were made public and gathered great momentum throughout much of the world ;I would think none would doubt.

How is it then,that those who still hold onto his name can now claim to be so close to the communion that he claimed was contrary to his belief in " the Just shall live by faith? ("Hab4:2,Heb 10:38.)

It is my belief that Martin Luther would have rejected the idea that the justification was maintained or increased through the “sacrament” of the “Eucharist” .This is because his assertions were so strong in relation to justification being by grace alone ,and that through the preached Evangel.

I believe Martin Luther was still unclear in his thinking in regards to the “Lord’s Supper” but was this due to his focus and fervent desire to express to all :that men can be freely justified and that before God without doing anything to improve themselves as such; but by trusting in Christ Jesus as all their Justification,and that before an holy God.Referencing Rom4:5 eg.as his argument. " But to him that work etch not ,but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly,his faith is counted for righteousness."

If you then claim not just this mans name only ,but the same Spirit( he claimed ) that moved in him: where are your nails upon the door; or in these days upon the " posts"?

Bernard,

I will share this with you. Right now I am struggling against sin, and it is over my conscience. I have not relied on His grace. His grace came to us through His taking on flesh, which does not lead to life, yet overcame in the flesh, by His Spirit, so all who live in the flesh can be one with Him. My conscience is forbiding me to accept His holy gift of unification to His salvation without turning my heart from this sin. This is what convicts me of my behavior AND belief! Pray for me. I am glad you are here with us.

You have much to learn. I have much to straighten. We both must rely on His grace to do anything. His Eucharist is our measure!!! Amen.

Sincerely
Michael

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

You can lead a horse to water but your can’t make him drink.

Do you normally resist every ounce of evidence if the topic bothers you?

There is only one water well that this horse drinks from and it is never from a man made drinking well, there is no need for this horse to be lead to another.

Forgive me, I am not here to resist anyone one here, and the topics here are welcoming, never bothering.

I only wish to clarify and give a testament of my Catholic faith, and correct those who may be mislead or misinformed of my Catholic faith. So I welcome any contradictions, so that a dialogue can be persued to clear up any misgivings or misunderstandings.

Our brief history together reveals a tolerance and respect that unfortunately keeps the status quo of separation. I hope in my generation we can move the subject from tolerance to peaceful sound resolutions of reconciliation.

The Catholic/Lutheran commission reveals the subject of catechises on a more grand level, that has opened the door to communication to reach true understandings from the Horse’s mouth. The reconciliation will come to pass after all (catechetical efforts) is revealed and understood from the mind of Christ in His mystical body the Church, who is the pillar and bulwark of TRUTH.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

"When Sacramentum was adopted as an ordinance by the early Christian church in the 3rd century,

the Latin word sacer(‘holy’) was brought into conjunction with the Greek word mysterion. (" secret rite") Sacramentum was thus given a sacred mysterious significance that indicated a spiritual potency. The power was transmitted through material instruments and vehicles viewed as channels of devine grace and as benefits in ritual observances instituted by Christ"

So I am not just playing with words .But you are correct in this respect ,in my opinion my faith is built upon the original meaning go the Greek original.

For: " faith cometh by hearing and hearing the word of God" Rom10:17.

I know I take your Brittanica shortened quote out of context here, when I give you the fact that the Church has been exercising the sacrament of baptism, since the apostles walked the earth in the first century not the 3rd century.

What happened in the 3rd century the whole Church surfaced from 400 years of persecution and settled the seven sacraments which we still practice today. They never got adopted as an ordinance. These were given to the Church by Jesus Christ himself who instituted them and commissioned the Church with. “Mysterium” in the Greek Sacrament in the Latin only named the seven, the Church never made them an ordinance, God is the only one who can make a sacrament.

But a secular media “brittanica”, does not speak of such mysteries. That is why your encyclopedia’s fall short of the Church’s official teaching into these mysteries. The carnal mind will miss it every time and falls short of the mysteries “sacraments” of God.

The sacraments were never adopted by the Church since the 3rd century, please leave that misinterpretation of the brittinica quote behind.

The Church from a context of speech, applies the Greek word Mysterium to the Sacrament on a par, = mystery, which I can agree with you.

Amen, and I hear that Word from Christ Himself in every Liturgy of the Word from the sacramental true presence during the Mass.

During the Mass is when man does not live on bread alone but by every Word of God, when we hear His Word, See His Word, taste His Word, smell His Word, that God is all and in all, when we Love God with all our being, so much so, that we consume the bread that comes from heaven.

Peace be with you

 

[Peter_J]

Our brief history together reveals a tolerance and respect that unfortunately keeps the status quo of separation.

It isn’t always easy to do what is right. However, I believe that, in the long run, it will lead us unity … better than if we created a “Lutheran Ordinariate”.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

It isn’t always easy to do what is right. However, I believe that, in the long run, it will lead us unity … better than if we created a “Lutheran Ordinariate”.

There is only one faith, one baptism, One Lord in the One body of Christ who is our head.

There can never be two.

I am sort of confused and concerned about the Lutheran/Orthodox dialogue. It appears the Lutherans believe that an agreement can be reached between the two distinct faith’s in understanding so that each faith can accept one another with each holding their own Traditions to reach a full communion? Someone in this dialogue is not being truthful to the other.

Peace be with you

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Bernard Lyons;11718400]So I am not just playing with words .But you are correct in this respect ,in my opinion my faith is built upon the original meaning go the Greek original.

You will find in Keepping with the Greek original it never conflicts with Latin from the same centuries. When ever you find a contradiction, you don’t have the original Greek.

Peace be with you

 

[Peter_J]

I am sort of confused and concerned about the Lutheran/Orthodox dialogue. It appears the Lutherans believe that an agreement can be reached between the two distinct faith’s in understanding so that each faith can accept one another with each holding their own Traditions to reach a full communion? Someone in this dialogue is not being truthful to the other.

I don’t know what you mean. Orthodox regard Lutherans, along with Catholics, Anglicans, Methodists, etc. as heterodox. In other words, they would say “We can’t unite with you unless you accept the Orthodox faith.”

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I don’t know what you mean. Orthodox regard Lutherans, along with Catholics, Anglicans, Methodists, etc. as heterodox. In other words, they would say “We can’t unite with you unless you accept the Orthodox faith.”

Im just as puzzled, from the post’s here from Lutheran’s that have or are engaged in “ecumenical” talks with the Orthodox?

I have no idea what the Orthodox or Lutheran’s definition of “unity” is? I care not to imagine what it is. So I would ask either Lutheran or Orthodox what is meant by unity from their dialogue?

There is never a confederation of different faith’s united as Church’s in the One mystical body of Christ. Although the Orthodox are independent of each other, they remain united by the same christian faith which makes them a federation of Church’s in one faith.

Jesus never had a twin brother? although some protestant circles will argue maybe Jesus did? because some non-catholics believe Jesus had maternal brothers.

Finding common ground on the True presence is not necessarily full communion.

Peace be with you

 

[EvangelCatholic]

There is only one water well that this horse drinks from and it is never from a man made drinking well, there is no need for this horse to be lead to another.

Forgive me, I am not here to resist anyone one here, and the topics here are welcoming, never bothering.

I only wish to clarify and give a testament of my Catholic faith, and correct those who may be mislead or misinformed of my Catholic faith. So I welcome any contradictions, so that a dialogue can be persued to clear up any misgivings or misunderstandings.

Our brief history together reveals a tolerance and respect that unfortunately keeps the status quo of separation. I hope in my generation we can move the subject from tolerance to peaceful sound resolutions of reconciliation.

The Catholic/Lutheran commission reveals the subject of catechises on a more grand level, that has opened the door to communication to reach true understandings from the Horse’s mouth. The reconciliation will come to pass after all (catechetical efforts) is revealed and understood from the mind of Christ in His mystical body the Church, who is the pillar and bulwark of TRUTH.

Thanks, Gabriel for your Catholic faith; we are close in belief. I don’t know of any other ecumenical effort that can compare to the Lutheran-Catholic Dialogues.

You mention “catechetical efforts”.

DEEPENING COMMUNION IN STRUCTURES AND MINISTRIES

The Church as Koinonia of Salvation: Its Structures and Ministries

1. We recommend that our churches recognize the real but imperfect communion among our ministers and encourage appropriate forms of pastoral collaboration between our ministries. Specifically, we propose:

that common activities among Lutheran and Roman Catholic bishops be promoted in order to signify the level of communion that exists between them, such as regular joint retreats, co-authored pastoral letters on topics of mutual concern, and joint efforts on matters of public good;

that mutual activities be intensified among ordained ministers, such as regular retreats, homily or sermon preparation study, participation in non-eucharistic prayer services and weddings, and common sponsorship of events or services in the life of the church, including as appropriate other leadership ministries;

that the faithful, in light of their common baptism into the people of God, engage together in catechesis, evangelization, peace and justice ventures, social ministry, and attendance at each other’s diocesan and synodical assemblies; and

that social ministry organizations, educational institutions, chaplaincies, and other church agencies engage together in activities that further the gospel and the common good.
usccb.org/beliefs-and-tea…-salvation.cfm

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Thanks, Gabriel for your Catholic faith; we are close in belief. I don’t know of any other ecumenical effort that can compare to the Lutheran-Catholic Dialogues.

You mention “catechetical efforts”.

Your postings have been informative and interesting and I thank you for posting them. I may refer back to them, as I was just invited to a Lutheran bible study during my stay while in Seattle Wash. I hope to attend if my schedule allows? That is going to be very interesting.

 

[Bernard_Lyons]

I know I take your Brittanica shortened quote out of context here, when I give you the fact that the Church has been exercising the sacrament of baptism, since the apostles walked the earth in the first century not the 3rd century.

The Church from a context of speech, applies the Greek word Mysterium to the Sacrament on a par, = mystery, which I can agree with you.

Peace be with you

Thank you Gabriel of 12
This was the whole point of my exercise and in my going to (uncharacteristicaly) a non biblical ( so mere human )source.

My point briefly was that the Greek word mysterium or the English translation mystery or the Latin equivilent Sacrament, can only be found in New Testament in relation to :

2Thess2:7" For the mystery of iniquity doth already work" and
1Tim3:16. “The mystery of Godliness”

Nowhere is the word mysterium or mystery, or sacrament found in connection to “the Lord’s Supper” ( I believe) in all references to it ; either in historical account or in its new testament practice.

For we who believe it is a remembrence ; and like the passover lamb,it symbolises Christs coming death anf it is not a mystery as such, but a series of actions (performed by Christ) to show the
spiritual reality of what the death of Jesus would mean for those who “believe.” (in him)
So therefore to us it is not a mystery. But is in this respect this mememorial is so much superior to the passover : the coming death pictured by a spotless lamb was as it where vailed. In type and shadow (or to a degree , a mystery)but the supper 's repetition was in substance and visable reality.