The Case Against Transubstantiation

[flameburns623]

Nobody has said anything that is worth responding to.

zerinus

God bless you Zerinus but I think you have too much of a prior conviction that what you believe is true to really engage any evidence anyone else brings before you. It’s really tough to glean from your posts that you truly reflect on, pray about, and really apply yourself to the questions being raised by others about this subject. I don’t think you’re dishonest: I think you’re just so utterly committed to what you already believe that you just cannot ever see anyone else’s point-of-view from anything other than the perspective that it MUST be wrong because you are so certain you are right. Think ‘invincible ignorance’. I don’t mean that to demean you, simply to point to a theological category that explains what I sense is where you are coming from in these discussions.

When I partake of the emblems of the flesh and blood of Christ at the Sacrament Meeting in our Church, I feel the presence of Christ in my life.

zerinus

That’s not incompatible with what Catholics believe, by the way. No one says that if you sincerely are serving Christ to the best of your understanding and ability, that Christ does not make Himself manifest to you in ways meaningful and precious to you. That does not however imply that the LDS sacrament is confected into the body and blood, soul and divinity of the Risen Lord Jesus Christ.

Again I say, Zerinus: God bless you!

 

[zerinus]

God bless you Zerinus but I think you have too much of a prior conviction that what you believe is true to really engage any evidence anyone else brings before you. It’s really tough to glean from your posts that you truly reflect on, pray about, and really apply yourself to the questions being raised by others about this subject. I don’t think you’re dishonest: I think you’re just so utterly committed to what you already believe that you just cannot ever see anyone else’s point-of-view from anything other than the perspective that it MUST be wrong because you are so certain you are right. Think ‘invincible ignorance’. I don’t mean that to demean you, simply to point to a theological category that explains what I sense is where you are coming from in these discussions.

That’s not incompatible with what Catholics believe, by the way. No one says that if you sincerely are serving Christ to the best of your understanding and ability, that Christ does not make Himself manifest to you in ways meaningful and precious to you. That does not however imply that the LDS sacrament is confected into the body and blood, soul and divinity of the Risen Lord Jesus Christ.

Perish the thought! Whoever said it was, or should, or would be?

Again I say, Zerinus: God bless you!

God bless you too!—and?

zerinus

 

[Stephen168]

flameburns:

The Sacrament is consecrated (‘blessed’, actually) on a table to the side of the main podium, and although the few minutes spent during this ritual are as reverent as possible–it is clear that Sacrament is mostly a prelude to the Main Event, which are the two or three talks presented by the speakers (on ordinary Sundays) or the testimonies of the congregation (on Fast-and-Testimony Sunday).

Do Mormon’s use the word consecration or blessing?
Are there special words of blessing and if so where do they come from?

Thanks

 

[zerinus]

flameburns:

Do Mormon’s use the word consecration or blessing?

In conversation we talk about blessing; but in reality it is a consecration as well as a blessing. The literal words used are “bless and sanctify”. “Sanctify” means to consecrate, or make holy.

Are there special words of blessing and if so where do they come from?

Yes, there are special words, and they come form the modern scriptures of the Church. You will find the expressions in the Book of Mormon as well as in the Doctrine and Covenants. They are the same. Here are the words for blessing the bread and wine, quoted from the Doctrine and Covenants:

**O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this bread to the souls of all those who partake of it, that they may eat in remembrance of the body of thy Son, and witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always remember him and keep his commandments which he has given them; that they may always have his Spirit to be with them. Amen. (D&C 20:77)

O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this wine to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they may do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them; that they may witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they do always remember him, that they may have his Spirit to be with them. Amen. (D&C 20:79)**

zerinus

 

[Scott36]

Jesus did correct His disciples for taking His words too literally. It seems that you haven’t read through this thread properly either. Don’t you think it would be a good idea to do so before replying?

zerinus

Hi Zernius!

The fact that you’re even on here means to me that Jesus is making his truth known to you and so we can both praise God and our Lord Jesus Christ for that.

To be honest I have read maybe a quarter of the posts, enough to get a good flavour of the nature of the discussion. Nonetheless we both need to have some charity…there’s no need to rail against people who have not read every post, especially in this age when so many are so busy with society’s demands. We can be thankful for those who apologize for not reading all the previous posts before they post and perhaps I should have apologized as well.

But your response to my post is a little perplexing and mysterious. I’m assuming that when you talk of Jesus correcting his disciples, you are thinking of:

John 6:63
“It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

Now I could talk about this now since you brought it up but I won’t becasue it has been covered in post 125 on pg. 9 and likely elsewhere and so I beleive the Catholic understanding of this passage has already been well defended. Moreover, I don’t see why you’d think I haven’t read the whole post from the mere fact that I merely mention something that I consider settled and already dealt with. The only reason I can think of for the nature of your response is that you are feeling overly defensive which is understandable since you are taking on so many Catholics who actually know their faith well.

I, in know way, even intended to draw attention to the argument of whether Jesus corrected or didn’t warn correct his disciples. To suggest that I did seems a little irrational.

OK I suppose I could be allowed to be a little irrational too, by discussing this issue a little after saying I wouldn’t. A thought has come to mind and I apologize if it has been said before. If this was a warning from Jesus it doesn’t seem that it was understood as such by anyone since there is no mention of any of His disciples saying: “Ohhhhh that’s what you me. Well, that’s cool then. We’ll stay with you” None of them said or did anything like that.

ok God bless you Zernius,
Scott

 

[zerinus]

John 6:63
“It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

Now I could talk about this now since you brought it up but I won’t becasue it has been covered in post 125 on pg. 9 and likely elsewhere and so I beleive the Catholic understanding of this passage has already been well defended.

I have organized my pages differently from yours, so posts do not appear on the same page for both of us. But post #125 on my browser is this one:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3531279#post3531279

Well, I have read through that post, and I can’t see how that objection is addressed in that post. Perhaps you can clarify.

zerinus

 

[Scott36]

Sorry I meant to correct my previous post, please consider this one not my previous one as I wrote some inaccuracies and was a little careless. I tried to correct it but it was too late…they only allow 20 min. to edit it.

Below is what I wanted to send:

Jesus did correct His disciples for taking His words too literally. It seems that you haven’t read through this thread properly either. Don’t you think it would be a good idea to do so before replying?

zerinus

Hi Zernius!

The fact that you’re even on here means to me that Jesus is making his truth known to you and so we can both praise God and our Lord Jesus Christ for that.

To be honest I have read maybe a quarter of the posts, enough to get a good flavour of the nature of the discussion. Nonetheless we both need to have some charity…there’s no need to rail against people who have not read every post, especially in this age when so many are so busy with society’s demands. We can be thankful for those who apologize for not reading all the previous posts before they post and perhaps I should have apologized as well.

But your response to my post is a little perplexing and mysterious. I’m assuming that when you talk of Jesus correcting his disciples, you are thinking of:

John 6:63
“It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

This has been covered in post 125 on pg. 9 and likely elsewhere and so I beleive the Catholic understanding of this passage has already been well defended. Moreover, I don’t see why you’d think I haven’t read the whole post from the mere fact that I merely mention something that I consider settled and already dealt with. The only reason I can think of for the nature of your response is that maybe you are feeling a little defensive which is understandable since you are taking on so many Catholics who actually know their faith well.

I didn’t intended to draw attention to this scriture and the question of it’s meaning, the argument of whether Jesus corrected or didn’t correct his disciples. I’m operating from the Catholic position that he didn’t, that the Eucharist is his real presence. My post wasn’t even really addressed to you zernius. I merely wanted to point out the weakness of the argument that says: "

“He would not have let so many of His disciples leave Him without correcting him if He was speaking figuratively, therefore He must have been speaking literally about His Eucharistic presence.”

But while we’re talking about, one point that I’d like to make:

If this was a warning from Jesus it doesn’t seem that it was understood as such by anyone since there is no mention of any of His disciples saying: “Oh that’s what you mean. Well, that’s ok…we can live with that. then.” No, they still left Him.

ok God bless you Zernius,
Scott

 

[AlegreFe]

When I got married at the age of 28 in 1975, I had not attended Mass in 10 years nor received the sacrament of confession…

Wow Ron, I love your testimony. I had tears of saddness but mostly joy for you. That was definitely God giving you the “sign” you needed when the Priest spoke again in Latin. God speaks to all of us in different ways. Perhaps God has already spoken to zerinus, he just needs that nudge/grace from God now to hear His words. I pray it happens soon, but all in God’s time.

 

[AlegreFe]

It seems to me that Jesus was (and still is) one of the most misunderstood people in all of history and it seems also to me from the bible that this was, in a sense, meant to be.

No arguement here from me.

Now we know that God, though our Lord and God, Jesus Christ calls all to conversion and salvation but it seems that his message is received well only for those who have been prepared by grace or natural good disposition (which too is a grace I suppose) to hear it and accept it.

I agree completely with what you’re saying here. I think many of us do.

Some scripture passages:

Matthew 11:25-26 "At the time Jesus declared, “I thank you Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to infants; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will.”

and

Luke 8:9-10
And when his disciples asked him what this parable meant, he said, "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God; but for others they are in parables, so that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.

…show that Jesus allowed misunderstanding sometimes, it seems to have been his style for whatever good purposes God had in mind.

Most absolutely. And I believe it was to separate the week from the strong, the proud from the humble, the disobedient from the obedient.

I am no scripture scholar. I’m just a stay-at-home mom who home schools her daughter. My daughter was graced with understanding since she was just a tot. In fact she taught me so much and she still is to this day at the age of 14. So I truly believe in what you say about the scripture passages especially Matthew 11:25-26.

I think that Jesus could have been clearer in John 6.

How much clearer would you want Him to be?

Jesus was very clear. What do you call saying over and over again, in fact 7 times, that we are to eat His flesh and that if we don’t we have no life in us? I think Jesus was very clear.

Yes as a Catholic John 6 helped me to have faith in the Eucahrist, and yes I think he was pretty clear with his language and his repetition but there are plenty of very intelligent people that don’t have the same interpretation of those scriptures. Jesus could have explained it more clearly so as to leave no other possible interpretation.

Jesus did indeed speak clearly. It is God who gives us the grace to understand and interpret it correctly. Those “very intelligent” people just haven’t been graced that’s all.

The whole bible could be misinterpreted but God graced the Church to interpret the bible correctly and that is why we have the Magisterium. I am glad and very grateful that God has put me on Peter’s boat. I never want to jump off his boat 'cause if I do, I don’t stand a chance on those tens of thousands of little rafts floating out there. They are not equipped with what I need to stay afloat or alive. Peter’s boat is equipped with Jesus Christ in the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Altar.

So let us not be too judgemental against our separated brethren (…and I’m not talking about Mormonism here.)

I wouldn’t call it judgemental. I would call it helping them to understand. I pray for all of them so that one day God will remove the scales from their eyes. I have a brother and a sister on one of those little rafts trying to stay afloat. So all I try to do is to help them to see, that’s all. I can’t have them “see” I can only help. It is God that converts through the Holy Spirit. I pray for all of them (including zerinus) and so does my daughter.

So it seems conceivable that if God was speaking figuratively that he would have allowed the misunderstanding (hypothetically speaking).

Well Scott, God was not speaking figuratively and I know you know that. He was very clear on this matter so there was no need for further clarification as He did in John 4:31-34 when His disciples thought He was talking about food. Jesus was talking about doing the will of His father. Since His disciples thought He was talking about food and not doing the will of His father he had to clarify. There was no need for clarification in John 6 because those people knew exactly what Jesus was talking about and they were not about to accept that they had to eat His flesh. So Jesus let them walk, John 6:66

 

[wisdomseeker]

“I am the Lady of the Rosary, I have come to warn the faithful to amend their lives and ask for pardon for their sins. They must not offend Our Lord any more, for He is already too grievously offended by the sins of men. People must say the rosary. Let them continue saying it everyday.”

–Our Blessed Mother to Lucia at Fatima
October 13, 1917

 

[AlegreFe]

Thank you. I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, more popularly known as the Mormons. When I partake of the emblems of the flesh and blood of Christ at the Sacrament Meeting in our Church, I feel the presence of Christ in my life.

zerinus

I have no doubt that you feel the presence of Christ in your life. I truly believe that God gives people graces at certain times. I do believe however, that the grace that God gives you is not the same as what we have here in the Catholic Church with the true, real and substantial presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. I even believe that those outside of the Catholic Church that believe in the real presence but don’t really have it also have many graces from God. It’s unfortunate that they don’t really have the substantial presence as we do in the Eucharist. I do believe that Jesus makes Himself present to you in spirit and with that, those outside the Catholic Church are indeed graced.

 

[AlegreFe]

Jesus did correct His disciples for taking His words too literally.

That’s right. But Jesus had no need to correct His disciples in John 6 and that is why He let them walk. Perhaps you should listen to that podcast again (ctlw83) and also watch my video again. You are in my prayers.

 

[wisdomseeker]

“Faith depends on hearing and hearing by the word of Christ; and, in turn, preaching depends on the word of Christ. Believing is an act of the intellect, which under the influence of the will moved by God through grace, gives its consent to divine truth” (St. Thomas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q.2, a.9,c).

 

[swariffin]

My testimony of the Restoration, my understanding of the gospel based on modern revelation as well as the Bible, and the authority of the holy priesthood that I have does!

Because I know that it is not true.

I know that it isn’t!

zerinus

Dear Zerinus,

You are welcome with your modern revelation as well as the new authority of your holy priesthood. You are also welcome to say that your doctrine is the one and the only single truth of God’s revelation. You are so convinced that you (and your church) are the most true Jesus’ church. I am happy to hear that. Now, I am willing to see that more and more mormon like you either willing to die under persecution rather than betraying God, or doing many good things like Mother Theresa did, and achieve her scale. For a first try, I suggest you can perhaps to evangelize mormonism in the Islamic countries. Do not do it in the internet media of any muslims blogs or forum, but physically go there. You can perhaps come to my country Indonesia to start the mission, as mormonism is unknown here. I myself only know mormonism a little from this forum, and from people like you (in which I thank you very much). Who knows that I can see you personally, rather than just being in this forum. You know, time will reveal the truth.

 

[TNT]

2 Thessalonians 2:10ff
10 And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying:
11 That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity. 12 But we ought to give thanks to God always for you, brethren, beloved of God, for that God hath chosen you firstfruits unto salvation, in sanctification of the spirit, and faith of the truth: 13 Whereunto also he hath called you by our gospel, unto the purchasing of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle. 15 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God and our Father, who hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation, and good hope in grace,

John 6:56
For my flesh is TRUE meat: and my blood is TRUE drink.
Simply put …
Really means, to a Mormon:
“For my flesh is NOT TRUE meat: and my blood is NOT TRUE drink.”

It’s not ignorance that’s invincible, but bad will, because of what God does to a person who holds it…
(see 2 Thess 2:10ff above).
Case closed.

 

[Ronald_E]

Wow Ron, I love your testimony. I had tears of saddness but mostly joy for you. That was definitely God giving you the “sign” you needed when the Priest spoke again in Latin. God speaks to all of us in different ways. Perhaps God has already spoken to zerinus, he just needs that nudge/grace from God now to hear His words. I pray it happens soon, but all in God’s time.

Sandy, You always say the nicest things to people. I must learn to be nicer. Thank you. Ron

 

[Scott36]

I have organized my pages differently from yours, so posts do not appear on the same page for both of us. But post #125 on my browser is this one:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3531279#post3531279

Well, I have read through that post, and I can’t see how that objection is addressed in that post. Perhaps you can clarify.

zerinus

Hello Zernius,

Well, it seems to me that he makes some good points on the meanings and therefore the distinction between the flesh and the spirit.

The word spirit is taken to mean symbolic or figurative by those who argue against the real presence on the basis of this scripture. Since it is not used in that way anywhere else in the bible(…and anyway who would think that in the first place, clearly spiritual and symbolic do not mean the same thing) it’s clear that the meaning of spirit is not symbolic or figurative or not literal. Is the Holy Spirit only a symbol?

He didn’t quote you but I found the part in your blog where you say:“In other words, those words were not meant to be taken literally, but spiritually” Perhaps you should change you blog since literally and spiritually are not opposites. I just looked up spiritual in a secular dictionary…not a hint of a suggestion that it means anything close to “not literal”.

I liked this part that he had to say too:

“Is for those of the flesh to understand that when they see the consecrated Host (bread) to their senses they see bread, when they see the consecrated wine, to their senses they see wine. Now this, transubstantiation say’s, when you see these species in your flesh, it does not availeth nothing, because that is what they are to your flesh, bread and wine. But to your soul, When you eat the bread and drink the wine, It is the body,blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, For it is the Spirit that gives life while you see and taste the bread and wine with your flesh it avails nothing. But It is the Spirit that makes these species the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. That is why when we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.”

But yes perhaps you are right, perhaps more can be said about this scripture passage:

John 6:63
“It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

Perhaps I can ask the question:
discuss the similarity/difference between John 6:63 and this statement:

“You have misunderstood me, I was talking figuratively. It is my words and my teaching that give you life if you accept them, not by eating my actual flesh and drinking my actual blood”

I see some similarities but not enough to doubt his Eucharistic statements earlier in John 6.

Lets start with the statement “the flesh is of no avail”. Now from the dictionary, I’ve learned that avail means 1. help benefit, 2…profit by take advantage of 3. provide help, be of use value profit. So it seems to me that he is saying: the flesh is of no benefit, the flesh is of no use. But there’s no way he is talking about his own flesh because that clearly contradicts

John 6:51, Hebrews 10:10
…anyway do we even need scripture passages here, we know Jesus sacrificed his body, flesh and blood, and offered it to save us from our sins. Therefore His flesh is defintiely of great “avail”!

So he must be talking about our flesh, the flesh that sees and tastes and senses the consecrated bread as what it appears to be, namely bread, but it’s not. Our flesh is of no avail for recognizing and experiencing the spiritual benefits of receiving Jesus in the Eucharist. But it’s the spiritual and very real (not figurative) benefits that we obtain not for our flesh but for our souls and spirits when we receive Jesus.

 

[AlegreFe]

“I am the Lady of the Rosary, I have come to warn the faithful to amend their lives and ask for pardon for their sins. They must not offend Our Lord any more, for He is already too grievously offended by the sins of men. People must say the rosary. Let them continue saying it everyday.”

–Our Blessed Mother to Lucia at Fatima
October 13, 1917

I believe in prayer so much for we are fighting against principalities & powers and against spiritual wickedness. Pray pray pray, and fast also. I believe in doing penance, that could be fasting or something else to try to make restitution. Some protestants seem to scoff at that because it sounds “too Catholic,” but we have been told in scripture to show fruits of our repentance, and simply put, that is doing penance.

Our Lady also said, “Penance, penance, penance!” This was first revealed by our Lady in Lourdes and repeated in Fatima. But she did not reveal anything “new” to us. It has already been revealed in Sacred Scripture to us by Jesus Christ. But God gave our Lady permission, I guess you could say, to reveal herself to us as she is a loving mother to all of us. She really cares about us and wanted to warn us before God’s wrath comes upon us in the end.

So we, who have the gift of faith, must pray for those who do not. I also believe that we need to pray for our own faith, “Jesus I believe, help my unbelief.”

 

[zerinus]

I’m assuming that when you talk of Jesus correcting his disciples, you are thinking of:

John 6:63
“It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

This has been covered in post 125 on pg. 9 and likely elsewhere and so I beleive the Catholic understanding of this passage has already been well defended.

Yes, I was referring to that verse, and I don’t see it having been “well defended” by the Catholic side at all. I don’t see anything in that post that address that objection.

I didn’t intended to draw attention to this scriture and the question of it’s meaning, the argument of whether Jesus corrected or didn’t correct his disciples. I’m operating from the Catholic position that he didn’t, that the Eucharist is his real presence. My post wasn’t even really addressed to you zernius. I merely wanted to point out the weakness of the argument that says: "

“He would not have let so many of His disciples leave Him without correcting him if He was speaking figuratively, therefore He must have been speaking literally about His Eucharistic presence.”

Yes, I appreciate that; and narrowing it down just to that I might say that I even agree with it.

But while we’re talking about, one point that I’d like to make:

If this was a warning from Jesus it doesn’t seem that it was understood as such by anyone since there is no mention of any of His disciples saying: “Oh that’s what you mean. Well, that’s ok…we can live with that. then.” No, they still left Him.

If you read that passage carefully, you will find that Jesus is deliberately provoking them with what He is saying. He is using a provocative language throughout. His aim was to test His disciples to see who believed in Him and who didn’t. His language continues to be provocative even after He has given them the explanation. Jesus often adopted that approach when dealing with the Jews, especially His adversaries. He never tried to appease them! When they showed signs of disbelief, He seemed to provoke them even more to either make them believe or add to their unbelief. Here is one typical example:

John 8:

39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham.

40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.

42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.

44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

In John 6 He is doing the same, except that He is doing it to His own disciples, to sift those that believe from those that believe not.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

I have no doubt that you feel the presence of Christ in your life. I truly believe that God gives people graces at certain times. I do believe however, that the grace that God gives you is not the same as what we have here in the Catholic Church with the true, real and substantial presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. I even believe that those outside of the Catholic Church that believe in the real presence but don’t really have it also have many graces from God. It’s unfortunate that they don’t really have the substantial presence as we do in the Eucharist. I do believe that Jesus makes Himself present to you in spirit and with that, those outside the Catholic Church are indeed graced.

I have no doubt that you feel the presence of Christ in your life. I truly believe that God gives people graces at certain times. I do believe however, that the grace that God gives you is not the same as what we have here in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That is because the Eucharist is a true Sacrament that needs to be performed by the authority of the priesthood, which only exists in the LDS Church. I even believe that those outside of the LDS Church that believe in the false doctrine of Transubstantiation, or “real presence,” as it is sometimes called, also may receive graces from God according to their belief in Christ. It’s unfortunate that they don’t really have the true Sacrament of the Eucharist in their lives as we do in the LDS Church. I do believe that Jesus makes Himself present to you in spirit and with that, those outside the LDS Church are indeed graced.

zerinus