E
EvangelCatholic
Guest
Yes, Lutherans have always referred to the Sacrifice of the Mass. Here is a reference from the first Lutheran archbishop of Sweden:
- Status
S
steido01
Guest
Want me to fetch you a knife and a ripe table for carving in?Alas, I think our two views are, essentially, the views that have always separated Calvinists and Lutherans.
P
Porknpie
Guest
Spirit does not mean symbolic. Where in the bible does the word spirit ever mean symbolic?
Jesus words in John 6, St Ignatius, Justin Martyr and the ECFs are very literal, “this is my body”. In the Greek,: munch, chew and gnaw on it. They are all of One Faith in saying that the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of our Lord. This is why the crowds left him and why Jesus let them go without correction. It’s why scripture records “this saying is hard, who can take it?”
OT: God provides earthly life through real heavenly food, the manna
NT: God provides everlasting life through symbolic food, the Eucharist.
No and no way! The OT foreshadows something much greater.
NT: God provides everlasting life through heavenly food, the body blood soul and divinity of our Lord, the Eucharist.
The NT former is a teaching from the 16th century. The latter is the apostolic faith for 2,000 years. Christ gave us this gift as a means of giving us grace for our salvation. We both agree we are saved by grace but the Eucharist being a sacrament is how we receive grace.
PnP
K
Kliska
Guest
I didn’t say it did.
P
PRmerger
Guest
This seems to be a very palatable and easy-to-accept way to interpret Jesus’ words.
However, the Scriptures say that what Jesus professed was very difficult to understand. And folks even left him over this mandate. And Jesus did not correct them and say, “Wait! Don’t leave! I really only meant a virtual presentation of my Body and Blood! Come back, disciples!”
P
PRmerger
Guest
And just to be clear: the Catholic Church does not deny a spiritual and symbolic aspect of the Eucharist.
It’s just not ONLY spiritual and symbolic.
It’s that good ole Catholic Both/And that makes Catholicism so formidable.
It’s always (well, usually) an attempt to dichotomize concepts and say “It’s This Idea ALONE or** ONLY**” that creates heresies and diversions from the One Faith.
To wit:
- when folks said Jesus was man ONLY that the Church had to step in and say, “No. It’s Both/And”.
- when folks said Jesus was God ONLY that the Church had to step in and say, “No. It’s Both/And”.
- when folks said that it’s the Bible ALONE that the Church had to step in and say, “No. It’s Both/And”.
- when folks said that it’s Faith ALONE that the Church had to step in and say, “No. It’s Both/And”.
- when folks said that it’s Science ALONE that the Church had to step in and say, “No. It’s Both/And”.
- when folks said that the Eucharist is symbolic ONLY that the Church had to step in and say, “No. It’s Both/And”.
B
benjohnson
Guest
Nothing like carving “This is my body” into a McDonalds table to get a police response. Next time I’ll do it in Latin and the confusion may buy me some extra time.Want me to fetch you a knife and a ripe table for carving in?
B
Buddyroe
Guest
Quite right you are. What I call ‘virtual presence’ is just my way of explaining how I view communion it is not meant to represent any formal doctrine that I know. This means of course that I do not follow the practice of believing in the ‘real presence’. However I must stop short of criticizing or refuting this RC (among others) belief and practice because Jesus understood the difficulty of what He was teaching. There are of course other scriptures that reinforce 'real presence as well.
Thank you for your observation, I must get dressed though so I can go to communion.
we’ll chat later I’m sure.
P
PRmerger
Guest
My favorite 4 words here on the CAFs.
Regardless–the rather palatable and benign “virtual presence” is contrary to the Scriptures. No one would leave Jesus over that concept, nor would anyone even remotely call that a "hard saying’.
[BIBLEDRB]John 6: 61[/BIBLEDRB]
P
Porknpie
Guest
Nor would one be condemned for receiving a “virtual presence” unworthily. Nor would one have died for having done so.My favorite 4 words here on the CAFs.
Regardless–the rather palatable and benign “virtual presence” is contrary to the Scriptures. No one would leave Jesus over that concept, nor would anyone even remotely call that a "hard saying’.
[BIBLEDRB]John 6: 61[/BIBLEDRB]
1 Corinthians 11
27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. 30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.[d] 31 But if we judged ourselves truly, we should not be judged. 32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are chastened[e] so that we may not be condemned along with the world.
Nor does a “virtual presence” in a protestant church fit with the prophet Malachi:
11 For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.
PnP
B
Buddyroe
Guest
Please understand (as you probably already do) that ‘virtual presence’ is simply a personal term I use to explain my understanding, as far as I know protestants do not teach a doctrine called 'virtual presence. It is true, except for Lutherans of course, that protestants do not align with ‘true presence’.
B
Buddyroe
Guest
As you probably know from earlier posts, I do acknowledge that it is a hard saying. What I should add is I personally take it as a hard saying, and I will admit at least in part it is why entertain a virtual presence explanation.My favorite 4 words here on the CAFs.
Regardless–the rather palatable and benign “virtual presence” is contrary to the Scriptures. No one would leave Jesus over that concept, nor would anyone even remotely call that a "hard saying’.
[BIBLEDRB]John 6: 61[/BIBLEDRB]
It is plain that our Lord knew that it is a hard saying, furthermore He understands that we struggle with it. Perhaps it is a very good thing that Jesus left us with a problem to solve, that a hard saying is beneficial to the strengthening our faith.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Understood.
Whatever the nomenclature, what you are professing regarding a “virtual presence” is a palatable, not-difficult-to-swallow (no pun intended) interpretation of Jesus’ words.
And I can think of at least 2 dozen non-Catholic posters here on the CAFs who have professed similar sentiments to your “virtual presence”, even if they did not apply that assignation.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Which one? Your virtual presence idea, or that Jesus is truly and substantially present, body, blood, soul and divinity, in the Eucharist?
Virtual presence makes it easy to accept. Not difficult at all.
It is peculiar to me that some Christians seem to believe we are better off not understanding Jesus’ words, or that it’s okay that some things are "unsolvable’. As apologist Dave Armstrong recently said, paraphrasing: it’s a bizarre and radical notion of late that some Protestants have embarked on a “quest for uncertainty.”
Catholics are not okay with that. In fact, we think it’s a great tragedy to be ok with uncertainty, when Jesus spent 3 years of his life making sure we got the news.
While 'tis true that there are a few things that we do leave to the “unsolvable” terrain, those issues are few and far between…and we still try to apprehend this terrain.
B
Buddyroe
Guest
Just to let yo know I regard the hard saying the very words Jesus taught the same teachings that form the understanding of real presence. I do not claim virtual presence to be a hard saying. I had not intended virtual presence to be the equivalence of real presence but I can easily understand how it may taken that way.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Could you please clarify exactly what you are saying? I don’t understand what you believe Jesus was saying in John 6, as it pertains to the dogma of the Real Presence.
J
Josephene
Guest
Have not read most of the posts but having come across the Holy Face devotion, thought this might be a good help for those who struggle to grasp more about the real Presence of The Lord , in The Eucharist;
cenacleosb.org/confraternity/- Bl.John Paul 11 's words about the Face of Jesus , in The Eucharist might help more to recognise , in a more personal aspect , the Lord being present , with the love and merits and mercy , as comprehensible to our human hearts , from the moment of His incarnation , to the heavenly glory … to be contemplated in joy and adoration , such as in this Litany -
holyfacedevotion.com/full_litany.htms
and ofcourse there is the reparative aspect , of The Face , in place of the sinfigured faces, in our lives that allow the enemy to bring claims against us ;
The sorrow of repentance from contemplation of The Holy Face , thus to help in our manifold needs , such as , for family healings - The Face that looked with tender love at His Parents and vice versa , for that love to flow into our hearts , to help us feel loved be able to love …
’ Show us The Father , that shall be sufficeient for us ’ - the Apostle had pleaded and The Lord obliges , with the presence of His Holy Adorable Face , there for us to behold , for any and every moment of our lives .
May we be blessed to often contemplate the Holy Face …
The Holy Face driving away powers of evil , during the 40 days of fasting and prayer , healing the sick, blessing babies , seeing to the needs of the couple , at the wedding at Cana …being adored by angels in heaven . and reparaion for the disfigured faces in our lives , from the wickedness of disbelief of His love and power , leading many to being out of sync with heaven and the ways of heaven , which is synonymous for the state of The Father’s perfect will …
May our hearts be cleansed , to be filled gratitude , that grasps even a bit of His love for us - The Lord of The Holy Face , that we become more Eucharistic !
cenacleosb.org/confraternity/- Bl.John Paul 11 's words about the Face of Jesus , in The Eucharist might help more to recognise , in a more personal aspect , the Lord being present , with the love and merits and mercy , as comprehensible to our human hearts , from the moment of His incarnation , to the heavenly glory … to be contemplated in joy and adoration , such as in this Litany -
holyfacedevotion.com/full_litany.htms
and ofcourse there is the reparative aspect , of The Face , in place of the sinfigured faces, in our lives that allow the enemy to bring claims against us ;
The sorrow of repentance from contemplation of The Holy Face , thus to help in our manifold needs , such as , for family healings - The Face that looked with tender love at His Parents and vice versa , for that love to flow into our hearts , to help us feel loved be able to love …
’ Show us The Father , that shall be sufficeient for us ’ - the Apostle had pleaded and The Lord obliges , with the presence of His Holy Adorable Face , there for us to behold , for any and every moment of our lives .
May we be blessed to often contemplate the Holy Face …
The Holy Face driving away powers of evil , during the 40 days of fasting and prayer , healing the sick, blessing babies , seeing to the needs of the couple , at the wedding at Cana …being adored by angels in heaven . and reparaion for the disfigured faces in our lives , from the wickedness of disbelief of His love and power , leading many to being out of sync with heaven and the ways of heaven , which is synonymous for the state of The Father’s perfect will …
May our hearts be cleansed , to be filled gratitude , that grasps even a bit of His love for us - The Lord of The Holy Face , that we become more Eucharistic !
B
Buddyroe
Guest
I’ll be glad to, thank you for the invitation.
Just to refresh my own mind here is part of what I wrote several days ago:
The Catholic teaching of this is literal, in context, and a faithful exegesis.
It is sometimes hard to accept, nevertheless it is the Word of our Lord.
Jesus continues for the purpose of making this point clear knowing the disciples and others present were in anguish over His instructions; drinking any blood is unacceptable, drinking human blood is barbaric, drinking divine blood is unthinkable. Jesus continues in anticipation of their concern.
Code:
*John 6:60-68 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away? Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.*An explanation is deserved and this is merely an explanation not intended to be a persuasion. I acquired my understanding of the Lords Supper from a Baptist congregation using in general the same scriptures for the same purpose as do Catholics.
Catholic thought was never discussed, my impression is it was completely unknown or at least not understood, an anti Catholic position was never presented. After Baptism I experienced communion a procedure common in much of Christendom. Cross wise to my doctrinal instruction I was taught more in detail a out the Passover feast from a Jewish understanding (from Jews). As a result I have participated in several Passover feasts using several Haggadahs (Jewish instruction manual for performing the Passover).
Perhaps you and others have done the same and you may therefore understand how my views have developed. Anyway have personally gone through the feast it presents an authentic experience that adds a vivid picture to the practice of communion. Now I am not a great advocate of synthesis or dialectics, compromise an balance are not among my presuppositions, but the Jewish dimension to communion leaves an indelible impression on me. The New Testament pivots on the Last Supper at the command of our Lord, it greatly benefits our understanding of the culture Jesus and his disciples were part of and interacted with. When I read in scripture that Jesus said: “this is my body” then realize next is snap! the bread is broken, this speaks to me to say in effect “you know what this bread is and what you have done with it every year of your life, now know that you were doing it to prophesy what is going to happen to me.” For the disciples (all Jewish) in the upper room at that instance the light bulbs should be turning on so to speak.
So when I take communion I am (in my minds eye) in the upper room, Jesus is there before me telling me why we are doing what is already understood.
This is not doctrine or persuasion, this is how I have come to understand communion so you will know how I think and feel.
One final thing; some may wonder if Buddyroe could just get past this stumbling block he would be ready for RCIA. Alas no, were real presence the only issue I would already be a monk.
Go in peace my friend, I rejoice with you that our Lord draws near when you receive Holy Communion.
N
Novocastrian
Guest
Would you explain this a little more, please?
(I’m not saying that I disagree with you, I’m just curious as to your thought process here)
P
PRmerger
Guest
This is an interesting statement. It is similar to a Roman or a Jew in the first century saying, “I accept that it is reasonable for these folks to come to the conclusion that Jesus Christ is divine. I do not argue against it.”
If it is true, then either one should be on his knees before Him…or it is false, and it is the most monstrous thing in the world–we are worshipping a man merely claiming to be God.
Similarly, if it is true that the Eucharist is what Catholics say it is, then you should be on your knees before Him in the Blessed Sacrament…or it is false, and it is the most monstrous thing in the world–we are worshipping a piece of bread.
So I cannot countenance your position which is, “It seems logical to believe in the Real Presence. I don’t argue against it.”
Either it is, and you should be on your knees before Him, or it is monstrously idolizing and you should be condemning this vociferously.
How can you be like a Roman or Jew who says, “Yes, He could be divine–I can see why people believe that” but not worshipping Him?
- Status