Transubstantiation...Your Take?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aidanbradypop
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

*"Mass is a truly propitiatory sacrifice, which means that by this oblation “the Lord is appeased, He grants grace and the gift of repentance, and He pardons wrongdoings and sins, even grave ones. For it is one and the same victim. He who now makes the offering through the ministry of priests and he who then offered himself on the cross. The only difference is the manner of offering” (Denzinger 1743).

The Mass cannot be understood apart from Calvary, of which it is a re-presentation, memorial, and effective application of the merits gained by Christ."*

Do you have an issue with this? Did not Christ’s sacrifice satisfy God’s judgment? Is that not what is meant by “redemption”. We offer this one sacrifice of Christ to the Father each and every day in every parish around the world and it is truly a propitiatory sacrifice.
It is a propitiatory sacrifice, in that it is a re-presentation of the original propitiatory sacrifice. That on Calvary. Not a repeated sacrifice, not another sacrifice, not an additional sacrifice, not an added sacrifice, not a later sacrifice. The Sacrifice, made present to us, as time and eternity intersect at the altar.

GKC
 
It is a propitiatory sacrifice, in that it is a re-presentation of the original propitiatory sacrifice. That on Calvary. Not a repeated sacrifice, not another sacrifice, not an additional sacrifice, not an added sacrifice, not a later sacrifice. The Sacrifice, made present to us, as time and eternity intersect at the altar.

GKC
Thank you. Very well put.
 
We are of one mind on this, I think. My late rector used to say that often.

GKC
Steve and GKC, we are at accord. I suspect it’s merely a difference of terms, tensor a misunderstanding.
 
:rotfl: :rotfl:

Let me add to the Lutheran chorus in that Transubstantiation is a reasonable explanation of what could be happening, but that our problem with it is that any metaphysical description will always fall short of the mystery.

That said, we Lutherans should also re-adopt the Catholic love for frequent Mass, and ensure that we have a weekly communion at least - several of our churches are bi-weakly or monthly. 😦
:clapping:
We should acutally do what the confessions say!! At least weekly!!

Jon
 
Jon, just a question. Is it true that you (Lutherans) believe that it ceases to be the body and blood of Christ after the liturgy. What do you do with left over hosts? We believe that once consecrated, the host remains the precious body and blood and must either be reserved in the tabernacle for the next Mass or consumed.

Thanks.
Hi Steve,
What Lutherans believe is that Christ’s intentions for His Supper was for us to “eat and drink”. So, Lutherans view the real presence within the sacramental act, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the real presence somehow disappears at the Benediction. Reverence for the reliquae is extremely important, the host either consumed or reserved separate for unconsecrated, the chalice is either poured onto the ground in a special place, or down a piscina.

Jon
 
Transubstantiation (and I hope I don’t have to type that word again!) is the root of Catholicism and it is what it is. We Catholics fully believe that the body and blood of Christ is in the Holy Eucharist at a Catholic Mass. That is the whole thing in a nutshell. Not to offend but that is not the case in a protestant church service. Only in a Catholic Mass and this is at the root of our differences.
No offense taken. This usually comes up in a discussion of the Holy Eucharist. The Catholic position is that, because of our orders, we do not have it. We, of course, disagree.

Curiously, there exists Catholic / Lutheran dialogue on the matter, which points to a high level of agreement. Worthy of the read.

prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/l-rc/doc/e_l-rc_eucharist.html

Jon
 
No offense taken. This usually comes up in a discussion of the Holy Eucharist. The Catholic position is that, because of our orders, we do not have it. We, of course, disagree.

Curiously, there exists Catholic / Lutheran dialogue on the matter, which points to a high level of agreement. Worthy of the read.

prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/l-rc/doc/e_l-rc_eucharist.html

Jon
Jon I have heard of some Lutheran congregations that fed the host to the birds and animals outside after service. Does that really happen?
 
You are correct in stating the Catholic Church is not the one that said believe what we say or else. The church, indeed any organized religion, is not one person with a singular mind, speaking for all who associate with said religion.

I did follow the link provided, and peruse the information provided. I must say that it brought back fond memories of people talking to my dad about their opinions and referencing scripture to ‘prove’ their views were correct and any other interpretation must be wrong. My dad is a retired minister with a doctorate in theology. I am, in no way suggesting his advanced education gives anything I have to say any more weight than it deserves, however, I am familiar with scripture and theological debate.

All of the points addressed on the web page reference scripture. If I were to argue my stance in this nature, I would site John 6:63. However, I am simply stating my opinion that was requested in the topic of this thread. I respect the right of anyone else to disagree with my opinion. Peace be with you.
Can you provide anything on that Augustine quote? This is a chuck for City of God where he was talking about heretics:

For these have eaten the body of Christ, not only sacramentally but really, being incorporated in His body, as the apostle says, “We, being many, are one bread, one body;” 1 Corinthians 10:17 so that, though they have afterwards lapsed into some heresy, or even into heathenism and idolatry, yet by virtue of this one thing, that they have received the baptism of Christ, and eaten the body of Christ, in the body of Christ, that is to say, in the Catholic Church, they shall not die eternally,

I doesn’t sound to me like Augustine is denying the Real Presence.
 
Jon I have heard of some Lutheran congregations that fed the host to the birds and animals outside after service. Does that really happen?
I’ve never seen it. In fact, I’ve only heard of it here at CAF. But if it does happen, it is a hideous act, of great disrespect to our Lord.

Jon
 
I’ve never seen it. In fact, I’ve only heard of it here at CAF. But if it does happen, it is a hideous act, of great disrespect to our Lord.

Jon
Glad to hear that. All I can do is pray for them.
 
Hi Steve,
What Lutherans believe is that Christ’s intentions for His Supper was for us to “eat and drink”. So, Lutherans view the real presence within the sacramental act, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the real presence somehow disappears at the Benediction. Reverence for the reliquae is extremely important, the host either consumed or reserved separate for unconsecrated, the chalice is either poured onto the ground in a special place, or down a piscina.

Jon
Thanks, Jon. Just to make sure I understand. You then believe that once consecrated, the host remains the body and blood of Christ, is that correct? It sounds to me like you follow the same procedure as the Catholic Church concerning the unconsumed hosts and wine. Having said that, what is the Lutheran view of Eucharistic adoration?
 
I want this thread to be a free for all when it comes to Transubstantiation. If your denomination is against this then please explain why. If your denomination agrees with transubstantiation then please go into more detail as how it is like or dislike that of the Catholic belief.

I do ask that you give evidence in support or not. Thanks and have fun!
Aidanbradypop,

Wow that is a mouthful of a name…here is the

Oriental Orthodox View…

stmaryscathedral.net/downloads/Faith%20of%20Our%20Fathers.pdf
Orthodox Faith
How Do We View the Eucharist? For the first thousand years of
Christian history the holy gifts of the Body and Blood of Christ were
received as just that: His body and Blood. The Church confessed this
was a mystery: The bread is truly His Body, and that which is in the
cup is truly His Blood, but one cannot say how they become so.
What follows is the Oriental Orthodox/United States Catholic Bishops joint agreement.

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/ecumenical/oriental-orthodox/eucharist.cfm
  1. We agree that in the Eucharist the Church assembled is carrying out the injunction of the Lord to do what he did in the Last Supper, in commemoration of him.
  2. We agree that just as bread and wine became Christ’s body and blood at the Last Supper, so do bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ when the Eucharist is celebrated by our Churches.
  3. We agree that the power of the triune God effects the change of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist. Traditionally, this has been attributed either to the Word or to the Spirit.
  4. We agree that the exercise of this divine power most properly is attributed to the Holy Spirit as source of God’s action and grace in the Church. This corresponds well with the Spirit’s role as life-giver, as overshadower in the incarnation, as sanctifier who sanctifies the bread and wine, become the body and blood of Christ, so that it sanctifies us when we receive it.
  5. We further agree that the consecration of the elements is effected through Christ, the risen Lord, true God and true man, who operates through the Spirit in the life of the Church. This corresponds well with Christ’s role in the Last Supper.
  6. We recognize that some Fathers of the Church, such as John Chrysostom, Severus of Antioch, and Ambrose of Milan, have taught that the Eucharist is effected by the words of Christ, “This is my body . . . ; This is my blood.” For when the priest pronounces these words during the anaphora, he does not do so in his own name but as representative of Christ and the Church.
But since what Christ did, once and for all, is made present now through the work of the Holy Spirit, other Fathers have held that the Eucharist is effected when the Holy Spirit has been invoked upon the gifts of bread and wine.
  1. We agree that in the anaphora or canon the account of institution, the anamnesis, and the epicletic prayers are all integral parts of a functional unity, and that the function of each can be properly understood only in the context of their mutual relations.
This is the Eastern Orthodox view…

christianityinview.com/orthodox/mysteries.html
The Eucharist (Greek: ‘Thanksgiving’) is the centre of Orthodox life and practice. Also known as the ‘Divine Liturgy’ or the ‘Mystic Supper’, the Eucharist is a profound experience of worship and praise.
Before the liturgy begins, the bread and wine are prepared in a service of preparation called the Proskomide. The bread is known as Prosphora, from the Greek: ‘Offering’. It is specially prepared and stamped with a seal and the words ‘Jesus Christ Conquers’ in an abbreviated Greek form. An example is shown here:
Orthodoxy agrees with the Catholic Church that Christ is truly present in the elements (the bread and the wine), but does not explain this change metaphysically i.e. it is content to leave the actual process as a divine mystery. Orthodox practice is always to give both the bread and wine to communicants, the usual method being by intinction i.e. the eucharistic bread is dipped into the wine. However, only those who have been fully Baptised and Chrismated into the church may receive. It is also a requirement that one should fast from the midnight before receiving.
Transubstantiation is descriptive of a belief…the belief is not the word, transubstantion, only an attempt to describe the belief. Without the word the belief does not change, it is only a descriptor…
 
I want this thread to be a free for all when it comes to Transubstantiation. If your denomination is against this then please explain why. If your denomination agrees with transubstantiation then please go into more detail as how it is like or dislike that of the Catholic belief.

I do ask that you give evidence in support or not. Thanks and have fun!
Pop,

While St. Augustine preceded the notion of Transubstantiation it is clear he would have acknowledged it…based on this.

Exposition on Psalm 99:8:
“O magnify the Lord our God” (ver. 5). Magnify Him truly, magnify Him well. Let us praise Him, let us magnify Him who has wrought the very righteousness which we have; who wrought it in us, Himself. For who but He who justified us, wrought righteousness in us? For of Christ it is said,“who justifies the ungodly.” Romans 4:5 . . . “And fall down before His footstool: for He is holy.” What are we to fall down before? His footstool. What is under the feet is called a footstool, . . . in Latin Scabellum or Suppedaneum. But consider, brethren, what he commands us to fall down before. In another passage of the Scriptures it is said, "The heaven is My throne, and the earth is
My footstool. Isaiah 66:1 Doth he then bid us worship the earth, since in another passage it is said, that it is God’s footstool? How then shall we worship the earth, when the Scripture says openly,“You shall worship the Lord your God”? Deuteronomy 6:13 Yet here it says, “fall down before His footstool:” and, explaining to us what His footstool is, it says, “The earth is My footstool.” I am in doubt; I fear to worship the earth, lest He who made the heaven and the earth condemn me; again, I fear not to worship the footstool of my Lord, because the Psalm bids me,“fall down before His footstool.” I ask, what is His footstool? and the Scripture tells me, “the earth is My footstool.” In hesitation I turn unto Christ, since I am herein seeking Himself: and I discover how the earth may be worshipped without impiety, how His footstool may be worshipped without impiety.
For He took upon Him earth from earth; because flesh is from earth, and He received flesh from the flesh of Mary. And because He walked here in very flesh, and gave that very flesh to us to eat for our salvation; and no one eats that flesh, unless he has first worshipped: we have found out in what sense such a footstool of our Lord’s may be worshipped, and not only that we sin not in worshipping it, but that we sin in not worshipping.
 
Thanks Coptic…You can just call me Dustin lol…Aidanbradypop comes from my two sons named Aidan and Brady and I am their pop 😉
 
Pop, While St. Augustine preceded the notion of Transubstantiation it is clear he would have acknowledged it…based on this. Exposition on Psalm 99:8:
We don’t need conjecture to say St. Augustine would have acknowledged transubstantiation. We have a record of exactly what he thought:

SERMON 272
ON THE DAY OF PENTECOST TO THE INFANTES, ON THE SACRAMENT

Circa 408

One thing is seen, another is to be understood
What you can see on the altar, you also saw last night; but what it was, what it meant, of what great reality it contained the sacrament, you had not yet heard.
So what you can see, then, is bread and a cup; that’s what even your eyes tell you; but as for what your faith asks to be instructed about, the bread is the body of Christ, the cup the blood of Christ.
It took no time to say that indeed, and that, perhaps, may be enough for faith; but faith desires instruction.
The prophet says, you see, Unless you believe, you shall not understand (Is 7:9).
I mean, you can now say to me, “You’ve bidden us believe; now explain, so that we may understand.”
Some such thought as this, after all, may cross somebody’s mind: “We know where our Lord Jesus Christ took flesh from; from the Virgin Mary
He was suckled as a baby, was reared, grew up, came to man’s estate, suffered persecution from the Jews, was hung on the tree, was slain on the tree, was taken down from the tree, was buried; rose again on the third day, on the day he wished ascended into heaven.
That’s where he lifted his body up to; that’s where he’s going to come from to judge the living and the dead; that’s where he is now, seated on the Father’s right.
How can bread be his body? And the cup, or what the cup contains, how can it be his blood?”
The reason these things, brothers and sisters, are called sacraments is that in them one thing is seen, another is to be understood.
What can be seen has a bodily appearance, what is to be understood provides spiritual fruit.
So if you want to understand the body of Christ, listen to the apostle telling the faithful, You, though, are the body of Christ and its members (1 Cor 12:27).
So if it’s you that are the body of Christ and its members, it’s the mystery meaning you that has been placed on the Lord’s table; what you receive is the mystery that means you.
It is to what you are that you reply Amen, and by so replying you express your assent.
What you hear, you see, is The body of Christ, and you answer, Amen.
So be a member of the body of Christ, in order to make that Amen true.
So why in bread? Let’s not bring anything of our own to bear here, let’s go on listening to the apostle himself, who said, when speaking of this sacrament, One bread, one body, we being many are (1 Cor 10:17).
Understand and rejoice. Unity, truth, piety, love.
One bread; what is this one bread? The one body which we, being many, are. Remember that bread is not made from one grain, but from many.
When you were being exorcised, it’s as though you were being ground.
When you were baptized it’s as though you were mixed into dough.
When you received the fire of the Holy Spirit, it’s as though you were baked.
Be what you can see, and receive what you are.
That’s what the apostle said about the bread. He has already shown clearly enough what we should understand about the cup, even if it wasn’t said.
After all, just as many grains are mixed into one loaf in order to produce the visible appearance of bread, as though what holy scripture says about the faithful were happening: They had one soul and one heart in God (Acts 4:32); so too with the wine.
Brothers and sisters, just remind yourselves what wine is made from; many grapes hang in the bunch, but the juice of the grapes is poured together in one vessel.
That too is how the Lord Christ signified us, how he wished us to belong to him, how he consecrated the sacrament of our peace and unity on his table.
Any who receive the sacrament of unity, and do not hold the bond of peace, do not receive the sacrament for their benefit, but a testimony against themselves.
Turning to the Lord, God the Father almighty, with pure hearts let us give him sincere and abundant thanks, as much as we can in our littleness; beseeching him in his singular kindness with our whole soul, graciously to hearken to our prayers in his good pleasure; also by his power to drive out the enemy from our actions and thoughts, to increase our faith, to guide our minds, to grant us spiritual thoughts, and to lead us finally to his bliss; through Jesus Christ his Son. Amen.
 
We don’t need conjecture to say St. Augustine would have acknowledged transubstantiation. We have a record of exactly what he thought:

SERMON 272
ON THE DAY OF PENTECOST TO THE INFANTES, ON THE SACRAMENT

Circa 408

One thing is seen, another is to be understood
What you can see on the altar, you also saw last night; but what it was, what it meant, of what great reality it contained the sacrament, you had not yet heard.
So what you can see, then, is bread and a cup; that’s what even your eyes tell you; but as for what your faith asks to be instructed about, the bread is the body of Christ, the cup the blood of Christ.
It took no time to say that indeed, and that, perhaps, may be enough for faith; but faith desires instruction.
The prophet says, you see, Unless you believe, you shall not understand (Is 7:9).
I mean, you can now say to me, “You’ve bidden us believe; now explain, so that we may understand.”
Some such thought as this, after all, may cross somebody’s mind: “We know where our Lord Jesus Christ took flesh from; from the Virgin Mary
He was suckled as a baby, was reared, grew up, came to man’s estate, suffered persecution from the Jews, was hung on the tree, was slain on the tree, was taken down from the tree, was buried; rose again on the third day, on the day he wished ascended into heaven.
That’s where he lifted his body up to; that’s where he’s going to come from to judge the living and the dead; that’s where he is now, seated on the Father’s right.
How can bread be his body? And the cup, or what the cup contains, how can it be his blood?”
The reason these things, brothers and sisters, are called sacraments is that in them one thing is seen, another is to be understood.
What can be seen has a bodily appearance, what is to be understood provides spiritual fruit.
So if you want to understand the body of Christ, listen to the apostle telling the faithful, You, though, are the body of Christ and its members (1 Cor 12:27).
So if it’s you that are the body of Christ and its members, it’s the mystery meaning you that has been placed on the Lord’s table; what you receive is the mystery that means you.
It is to what you are that you reply Amen, and by so replying you express your assent.
What you hear, you see, is The body of Christ, and you answer, Amen.
So be a member of the body of Christ, in order to make that Amen true.
So why in bread? Let’s not bring anything of our own to bear here, let’s go on listening to the apostle himself, who said, when speaking of this sacrament, One bread, one body, we being many are (1 Cor 10:17).
Understand and rejoice. Unity, truth, piety, love.
One bread; what is this one bread? The one body which we, being many, are. Remember that bread is not made from one grain, but from many.
When you were being exorcised, it’s as though you were being ground.
When you were baptized it’s as though you were mixed into dough.
When you received the fire of the Holy Spirit, it’s as though you were baked.
Be what you can see, and receive what you are.
That’s what the apostle said about the bread. He has already shown clearly enough what we should understand about the cup, even if it wasn’t said.
After all, just as many grains are mixed into one loaf in order to produce the visible appearance of bread, as though what holy scripture says about the faithful were happening: They had one soul and one heart in God (Acts 4:32); so too with the wine.
Brothers and sisters, just remind yourselves what wine is made from; many grapes hang in the bunch, but the juice of the grapes is poured together in one vessel.
That too is how the Lord Christ signified us, how he wished us to belong to him, how he consecrated the sacrament of our peace and unity on his table.
Any who receive the sacrament of unity, and do not hold the bond of peace, do not receive the sacrament for their benefit, but a testimony against themselves.
Turning to the Lord, God the Father almighty, with pure hearts let us give him sincere and abundant thanks, as much as we can in our littleness; beseeching him in his singular kindness with our whole soul, graciously to hearken to our prayers in his good pleasure; also by his power to drive out the enemy from our actions and thoughts, to increase our faith, to guide our minds, to grant us spiritual thoughts, and to lead us finally to his bliss; through Jesus Christ his Son. Amen.
Off,

So you accept the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Praise the lord…amen and alleluia:)
 
We don’t need conjecture to say St. Augustine would have acknowledged transubstantiation. We have a record of exactly what he thought:.
Excuse me folks, but St. Augustine is talking about the Real Presence, not transsubstantiation. Transsubstantiation is based on a Aristotelian metaphysics and St. Augustine was a Platonist.
 
Excuse me folks, but St. Augustine is talking about the Real Presence, not transsubstantiation. Transsubstantiation is based on a Aristotelian metaphysics and St. Augustine was a Platonist.
Smaneck,

Excuse me but apples fell from tree long before someone called it gravity. Naming what is experienced or believed does not change the experience or belief.

Motion/Travel

Walking, Running, Wheels, Carts, Horse drawn carriage, riding a horse, steam engine, combustion engine, Jet plane, Rocket, Satellite…

None of these change the notion of Motion or Travel…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top