The Eucharist - Consubstantiation? Symbolic? I don't think so

[NotWorthy]

To any Christians who wish to return to the early Apostolic Church, one needs to look at the how the Early Church treated the Eucharist. Two early incidents, in my opinion debunk several teachings on the Eucharist.

The first is the Eucharist is symbolic - To see how much the Eucharist was reverenced, just look to St. Tarsicius “At Rome, on the Appian Way, the passion of St. Tarsicius the acolyte, whom the heathen met bearing the sacrament of the Body of Christ and asked him what it was he carried. He judged it a shameful thing to cast pearls before swine, and so was attacked by them for a long time with sticks and stones, until he gave up the ghost. When they turned over his body, the sacrilegious assailants could find no trace of Christ’s sacrament, either in his hands or among his clothing.” Why would one die willingly simply for a symbolic piece of bread.

The second is Consubstantiation, or more specifically as a result of consubstantiation, the reasoning that Christ is only present in the bread and wine during the Church Service, but not afterwards - bread and wine and water are brought, and the presider in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons” (Justin Martyr, First Apology 1, 67).

If the Church thought that the Eucharist was only symbolic, why would people die rather than hand it over to non-believers, and why would the Church revere those who thought this way?

And, if the presence of Christ in the Eucharist occurred only during the Mass, why would a portion be sent out to the sick and elderly?

 

[Teflon93]

Indeed.

 

[Rightlydivide]

1. This man who lived in the third century did not think it was symbolic
2. The Lords Supper being brought to a nursing home is done by many denominations and churches who believe it is symbolic
   wordandway.org/article.php?ww_article_id=32

 

[NotWorthy]

1. This man who lived in the third century did not think it was symbolic
2. The Lords Supper being brought to a nursing home is done by many denominations and churches who believe it is symbolic
   wordandway.org/article.php?ww_article_id=32

1. The Church honors someone who realized it wasn’t symbolic.The Chruch soean’t claim that this guy died for nothing. Hmmmmm…
2. There are those who think Christ is present only during the church service. So why go through the effort to bring it to the elderly if Christ is no longer there?

 

[Teflon93]

P - Many people sit in pews in many sanctuaries who do not believe in God.

C - Therefore, those communities do not believe in God.

or

C - There is no God,

The logic doesn’t hold up, does it?

 

[By_His_Mercy]

1. This man who lived in the third century did not think it was symbolic
2. The Lords Supper being brought to a nursing home is done by many denominations and churches who believe it is symbolic
   wordandway.org/article.php?ww_article_id=32

Here’s someone much earlier that that…

Ignatius of Antioch wrote to the Smyrneans, est. 105-115 A.D.

CHAPTER 6 6:1 Let no man be deceived. Even the heavenly beings and the glory of the angels and the rulers visible and invisible, if they believe not in the blood of Christ [who is God], judgment awaiteth them also. He that receiveth let him receive. Let not office puff up any man; for faith and love are all in all, and nothing is preferred before them. 6:2 But mark ye those who hold strange doctrine touching the grace of Jesus Christ which came to us, how that they are contrary to the mind of God. They have no care for love, none for the widow, none for the orphan, none for the afflicted, none for the prisoner, none for the hungry or thirsty. They abstain from eucharist (thanksgiving) and prayer, because they allow not that the eucharist is the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which flesh suffered for our sins, and which the Father of His goodness raised up.

CHAPTER 7 7:1 They therefore that gainsay the good gift of God perish by their questionings. But it were expedient for them to have love, that they may also rise again. 7:2 It is therefore meet that ye should abstain from such, and not speak of them either privately or in public; but should give heed to the Prophets, and especially to the Gospel, wherein the passion is shown unto us and the resurrection is accomplished.

CHAPTER 8 8:1 [But] shun divisions, as the beginning of evils. Do ye all follow your bishop, as Jesus Christ followed the Father, and the presbytery as the Apostles; and to the deacons pay respect, as to God’s commandment. Let no man do aught of things pertaining to the Church apart from the bishop. Let that be held a valid eucharist which is under the bishop or one to whom he shall have committed it. 8:2 Wheresoever the bishop shall appear, there let the people be; even as where Jesus may be, there is the universal Church. It is not lawful apart from the bishop either to baptize or to hold a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve, this is well-pleasing also to God; that everything which ye do may be sure and valid.

That’s pretty early…many people say Ignatius knew the apostle John.

God bless you!

• BHM

 

[NotWorthy]

That’s pretty early…many people say Ignatius knew the apostle John.

Thanks for the quotes, BHM, but remember, Ignatius’ pedigree is far greater than this.

He was ordained a priest by Peter and he studied under John (not simply “knew him”).

I’m going to trust the words of Ignatius far sooner than I’d trust someone’s who’s name speaks volumes (what in the world does “rightlydivide” mean anyway?).

 

[Rightlydivide]

1. The Church honors someone who realized it wasn’t symbolic.The Chruch soean’t claim that this guy died for nothing. Hmmmmm…

I cannot figure out what this means. Once again, the church at this time did not hold a symbolic view. Is that what you are getting at? Is someone denying that? Not I.

1. There are those who think Christ is present only during the church service. So why go through the effort to bring it to the elderly if Christ is no longer there?

 

[Rightlydivide]

Thanks for the quotes, BHM, but remember, Ignatius’ pedigree is far greater than this.

He was ordained a priest by Peter and he studied under John (not simply “knew him”).

I’m going to trust the words of Ignatius far sooner than I’d trust someone’s who’s name speaks volumes (what in the world does “rightlydivide” mean anyway?).

Interpolated or forgeries. Or just a good example of one of the earliest heretics.
Thank you for asking about my name NotWorthy. It is in the Bible, I am sure you will come up with it.

 

[Teflon93]

The same reason that you pray with someone outside of church, listen to sermons online, read the Bible at home, sing hymns when cleaning the house. I am sure you understand that symbolic does not mean unimportant? I am pointing out that many groups distribute the Lords Supper at people’s home and still hold a symbolic view. Whether you agree with their interpretation or not, the failure to empathize or understand another perspective is disconcerting.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Rightlydivide;4451396:

And what do these people do with the symbolic leftover bread and the symbolic leftover wine?

I would assume that it would probably be grape juice and some form a wafer or cracker…but I do not know…I do not know. For those who hold the symbolic view, what is important is what the act inspires us to remember, not the elements. Concern about what happens to the objects used shows your starting presupposition.
Now let me ask you, what happens to the accidents and what about there losing their physical shape causes the accidents to disappear?

 

[Teflon93]

Teflon93;4451419:

I would assume that it would probably be grape juice and some form a wafer or cracker…but I do not know…I do not know. For those who hold the symbolic view, what is important is what the act inspires us to remember, not the elements. Concern about what happens to the objects used shows your starting presupposition.
Now let me ask you, what happens to the accidents and what about there losing their physical shape causes the accidents to disappear?

I’ll tell you what they do, having seen them do it in the Pentecostal Church of God I used to attend, and in the Presbyterian community I used to attend.

They throw them in the garbage.

That is an act which has symbolism too.

And please show me in the Bible while you’re at it where Christ bids us commemorate him with grape juice, which did not exist until Welch perfected pasteurization in the 1830s.

 

[mojob]

Consubstantiation
tt=76
This heretical doctrine is an attempt to hold the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist without admitting Transubstantiation. According to it, the substance of Christ’s Body exists together with the substance of bread, and in like manner the substance of His Blood together with the substance of wine. Hence the word Consubstantiation. How the two substances can coexist is variously explained. The most subtle theory is that, just as God the Son took to Himself a human body without in any way destroying its substance, so does He in the Blessed Sacrament assume the nature of bread. Hence the theory is also called “Impanation”, a term founded on the analogy of Incarnation
:mad

 

[Teflon93]

Here is the Catechism on Transubstantiation:

1376 The Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring: “Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation.”

and

1413 By the consecration the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is brought about. Under the consecrated species of bread and wine Christ himself, living and glorious, is present in a true, real, and substantial manner: his Body and his Blood, with his soul and his divinity (cf. Council of Trent: DS 1640; 1651).

And of course in many another thread on this well-trod topic you’ll find that the ECFs all took the Eucharist. Not a symbolic act on their parts; St Augustine refers to Christ holding himself in his hands at the Last Supper, etc.

 

[Teflon93]

Consubstantiation
tt=76
This heretical doctrine is an attempt to hold the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist without admitting Transubstantiation. According to it, the substance of Christ’s Body exists together with the substance of bread, and in like manner the substance of His Blood together with the substance of wine. Hence the word Consubstantiation. How the two substances can coexist is variously explained. The most subtle theory is that, just as God the Son took to Himself a human body without in any way destroying its substance, so does He in the Blessed Sacrament assume the nature of bread. Hence the theory is also called “Impanation”, a term founded on the analogy of Incarnation
:mad

It is nothing more than an attempt to circumvent the lack of valid Holy Orders and therefore the lack of a valid Eucharist.

And a fine example of the theology by subtraction every non-Catholic practices as they pick and choose which portions of the Church to mimic.

 

[cerad]

P - Many people sit in pews in many sanctuaries who do not believe in God.

C - Therefore, those communities do not believe in God.

or

C - There is no God,

The logic doesn’t hold up, does it?

Seems reasonable to me.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Rightlydivide;4451440:

I’ll tell you what they do, having seen them do it in the Pentecostal Church of God I used to attend, and in the Presbyterian community I used to attend.

They throw them in the garbage.

That is an act which has symbolism too.

And please show me in the Bible while you’re at it where Christ bids us commemorate him with grape juice, which did not exist until Welch perfected pasteurization in the 1830s.

The Bible does not record what happened to the leftover bread or wine. It is not the bread or wine that is important in a symbolic view. As such, I find it odd that anyone would have a problem with that. I fail to see why someone would be concerned with what is not eaten in a symbolic view. In a symbolic view, what is eaten eventually ends up in the sewer system. I fail to see why what was not eaten would be more important that what is eaten. In reality, what is not eaten appears to have a better fate…
Wine and grape juice have the same general source. I have no idea what kind of wine they used then, how long it fermented, what variety of grape was used etc

 

[Rightlydivide]

Here is the Catechism on Transubstantiation:

and

And of course in many another thread on this well-trod topic you’ll find that the ECFs all took the Eucharist. Not a symbolic act on their parts; St Augustine refers to Christ holding himself in his hands at the Last Supper, etc.

cl.cam.ac.uk/~ig206/oak_tree.html

 

[Teflon93]

Teflon93;4451545:

The Bible does not record what happened to the leftover bread or wine. It is not the bread or wine that is important in a symbolic view. As such, I find it odd that anyone would have a problem with that. I fail to see why someone would be concerned with what is not eaten

in a symbolic view. In a symbolic view, what is eaten eventually ends up in the sewer system. I fail to see why what was not eaten would be more important that what is eaten. In reality, what is not eaten appears to have a better fate…
Wine and grape juice have the same general source. I have no idea what kind of wine they used then, how long it fermented, what variety of grape was used etc

Grape juice ferments almost instantly, particularly in hot climes. Indeed, the trick is to stop it from fermenting if you don’t want alcohol, which is why the prohibitionist Welch developed a process to do just that. In the 1830s.

Grape juice simply didn’t exist until then—it wouldn’t keep.

Christ did not say to that grape juice was his blood, nor command we should drink grape juice in memory of him.

Let me ask you this—what do you do with the Cross and the altar between services? Do you throw them away?

 

[Teflon93]

cl.cam.ac.uk/~ig206/oak_tree.html

Something I’m sure St Augustine, Platonist he, would have found mildly amusing.