What dear friend, do you find strange about Catholicism?

[benhur]

I would say that Augustine speaks beyond his time and circumstances, but also within them. The CC was completely sacramental from before the NT was completed. I will agree that the way the Sacraments were practiced has changed in some ways, but when we read about the celebration of the Mass with Justin Martyr, it is clear that Augustine embraced the faith that was written.

JUSTIN MARTYR

Converted A.D. 133, Martyr A.D. 165. “A disciple of Apostles” (Ep. ad Diogn.); “A man not far from the Apostles, either in time or in virtue” (S. Method, in Phot. Cod. 247).

S. Justin speaks of the consecrated elements, as not being common bread or common drink (above, pp. 92; 144); he believed that our Lord by “the fruit of the vine” meant real wine (above, pp. 134–136); and that the consecrated elements nourished (p. 144).

“We, after we have thus washed him who is persuaded and has assented to our belief, lead him to those called brethren, where they are assembled, that we may with earnestness make common prayers for ourselves and the enlightened [baptized] person, and all others every where, that it may be vouchsafed to us, having learned the truth, to be found, in deeds good administrators and guardians of the commandments, that so we may be saved by an everlasting salvation. Having ceased from the prayers, we greet one another with a kiss; then bread and a cup of water and wine are brought to him who presideth over the brethren, and he, receiving them, sendeth up praise and glory to the Father of all, through the Name of the Son and the Holy Spirit, and maketh at much length an Eucharistic prayer for having had these things vouchsafed to him. When he hath ended the prayer and thanksgiving, the whole people present join in with one voice, saying, Amen (but Amen is in Hebrew, ‘so be it’). He who presideth, having made this prayer, and all the people having assented, those called among us ‘deacons’ give to each of those present to partake of the bread, and wine and water, over which thanksgiving has been made, and carry it to those not present.
“This Food is amongst us called Eucharist, whereof no one may partake, save he who believeth that what is taught by us is true, and hath been washed in that laver which is for the remission of sins and to regeneration, and liveth as Christ hath delivered; for we do not receive It as common bread or as common drink, but, in what way Jesus Christ our Saviour, being through the Word of God Incarnate, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so also have we been taught that the Food, over which thanksgiving has been made by the prayer of the word which is from Him (from which [food] our blood and flesh are by transmutation nourished), is the Flesh and Blood of Him, the Incarnate Jesus. For the Apostles, in their records which are called the Gospels, have delivered that Jesus so commanded them, that He, having taken bread and given thanks, said, ‘Do this in remembrance of Me. This is My Body;’ and likewise, having taken the Cup and given thanks, He said, ‘This is My Blood,’ and gave it to them alone. Which also, wicked devils imitating, delivered to be observed in the mysteries of Mithra. For that bread and a cup of water are placed in the rites of the initiated, with certain words subjoined, ye either know, or can learn.
“Henceforward we ever remind one another of these things; and we, who have means, succour all who are needy, and are ever united to one another. And over all our oblations we bless the Creator of all things through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday all who live in city or country meet together, and the memoirs of the Apostles or the writings of Prophets are read, as the time permits. Then, when the reader has closed, he who presides admonishes and exhorts in a sermon to the imitation of these noble deeds. Then we all rise together, and send up prayers: and, as we said before, when we have done prayer, bread is brought, and wine, and water: and he who presides utters prayers and thanksgivings to the best of his power, and the people join in with one voice, saying, Amen: and those things over which the Eucharistic prayer has been said, are distributed and received by each, and are sent to the absent by the Deacons.”

This is the same structure of the Mass that we still follow today. It has been handed down from the Apostles.

“Now it is evident, that in this prophecy [allusion is made] to the bread which our Christ gave us to eat, in remembrance of His being made flesh for the sake of His believers, for whom also He suffered; and to the cup which He gave us to drink, in remembrance of His own blood, with giving of thanks”. Justin Martyr ,Dialogue with Trypho ch 70

Justin still calls them bread and wine but assigns Christ’s presence to them, more like the Orthodox ,or even Luther

The transmutation is in reference to the food (bread and wine) of the Eucharist ceremony that nourishes us. Something like converting food to become nourishing to or part of our body.

As far as the Mass, thanksgiving is what Martyr witnesses. The prayer is thanksgiving, and thanksgiving over, and* not *to change the elements, or pray that it may “be acceptable”, not that the entire ceremony be "acceptable’’, *not *like a sacrificial offering up to God, which evolved later in history.

In his Mass, a" presider", a president, officiates, not a priest, though it may be, but he does not call it priest, twice. The official necessity/regulation of a priest also evolves later.

Blessings

 

[fred_conty]

Correct, Augustine did not deny a sort of real presence, but it is not in the strictest Catholic transubstantiated idea. Another words, he would not say symbolic only, just as he would not say the bread and wine become His literal body and blood.

Blessings

St. Ignatius of Antioch was the disciple of St. John, apostle and evangelist. Here are a couple of quotes from him.

St. Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, 7, 110 A.D.:

I desire the Bread of God, the heavenly Bread, the Bread of Life, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became afterwards of the seed of David and Abraham; I wish the drink of God, namely His blood, which is incorruptible love and eternal life.

Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, Chapter 6, 110 A.D.:

Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God … They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes.

Here are some quotes from others in the early church about Christ’s real presence in the Eucharist.

therealpresence.org/eucharst/father/a5.html#ignatius

But here is one from St. Paul himself which is the earliest and the best, 1 Corinthians 11.

27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves.

The last sentence is especially important since St. Paul uses the word “discerning” … recognizing the body of Christ. And the consequences of not discerning the body is condemnation.

Transubstantiation, tho not used until centuries later, it was understood even in Christ’s day. For at Cana he changed the 125 gallons of water into wine. Christ changed one substance into another. So too at the last supper, he changed the wine into his blood, the substance of wine became the substance of another…the blood of Christ. As Christ changed the water at Cana, he changed the wine at Jerusalem.

When we stop and think about the reality of this there are two reactions … too great! … how great!. "Do this … was Christ’s request to us because that is how greatly he loved us…“I will be with you always”.

 

[eazyduzit]

St. Ignatius of Antioch was the disciple of St. John, apostle and evangelist. Here are a couple of quotes from him.

St. Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, 7, 110 A.D.:

Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, Chapter 6, 110 A.D.:

Here are some quotes from others in the early church about Christ’s real presence in the Eucharist.

therealpresence.org/eucharst/father/a5.html#ignatius

But here is one from St. Paul himself which is the earliest and the best, 1 Corinthians 11.

The last sentence is especially important since St. Paul uses the word “discerning” … recognizing the body of Christ. And the consequences of not discerning the body is condemnation.

Transubstantiation, tho not used until centuries later, it was understood even in Christ’s day. For at Cana he changed the 125 gallons of water into wine. Christ changed one substance into another. So too at the last supper, he changed the wine into his blood, the substance of wine became the substance of another…the blood of Christ. As Christ changed the water at Cana, he changed the wine at Jerusalem.

When we stop and think about the reality of this there are two reactions … too great! … how great!. "Do this … was Christ’s request to us because that is how greatly he loved us…“I will be with you always”.

The way I see it, it is not logical or fair to compare the miracle at Cana with the Last Supper.
First note that it was evident that the water was no longer water but wine. It was perfectly evident to the senses. They did not drink plain water and then try to say that it was now not water, but really wine that just looked and tasted like water. No that is not what happened.

But in the Catholic miracle you have something that is said to change, but it can’t be perceived. It deceives the senses. It pretends to be something it is not. Now, Jesus never did a miracle that was not perfectly evident and undeniable. Why would He now do something that is a lie on the surface? That is really not worthy of God. God is capable of actually changing things in a way we can perceive. It is not hard for Him.

For instance, if I am saved, but I still curse and steal and drink, I am not really changed and my alleged salvation is a lie because there is no change. God’s work always produces a real change that we can see.

Shalom,
Jerry

 

[fred_conty]

The way I see it, it is not logical or fair to compare the miracle at Cana with the Last Supper.
First note that it was evident that the water was no longer water but wine. It was perfectly evident to the senses. They did not drink plain water and then try to say that it was now not water, but really wine that just looked and tasted like water. No that is not what happened.

But in the Catholic miracle you have something that is said to change, but it can’t be perceived. It deceives the senses. It pretends to be something it is not. Now, Jesus never did a miracle that was not perfectly evident and undeniable. Why would He now do something that is a lie on the surface? That is really not worthy of God. God is capable of actually changing things in a way we can perceive. It is not hard for Him.

For instance, if I am saved, but I still curse and steal and drink, I am not really changed and my alleged salvation is a lie because there is no change. God’s work always produces a real change that we can see.

Shalom,
Jerry

Jerry you have made a good point. But there is another side to this.

How could we eat his flesh and drink his blood if it looked and tasted as such? Jesus was thinking of us and wanted to be one with us and in his kindness made it so that we would not hesitate to make him welcome in our hearts.

 

[fbl9]

chopped.

For instance, if I am saved, but I still curse and steal and drink, I am not really changed and my alleged salvation is a lie because there is no change. God’s work always produces a real change that we can see.

Shalom,
Jerry

I want to address this part. So you(hypothetically) still steal etc. and know it is wrong. Are you trying not to do these things and feel guilty when you do these things. If so then God`s grace is working in you…

 

[adrift]

Jerry you have made a good point. But there is another side to this.

How could we eat his flesh and drink his blood if it looked and tasted as such? Jesus was thinking of us and wanted to be one with us and in his kindness made it so that we would not hesitate to make him welcome in our hearts.

Add to this is that we don’t consume a part of Jesus but the whole of Jesus Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

 

[Peter_J]

Benhur, aren’t you afraid of being excommunicated from your church for quoting Justin Martyr?

 

[Peter_J]

(Kidding.)

 

[adrift]

The way I see it, it is not logical or fair to compare the miracle at Cana with the Last Supper.

Not fair?
Not logical?

First note that it was evident that the water was no longer water but wine. It was perfectly evident to the senses. They did not drink plain water and then try to say that it was now not water, but really wine that just looked and tasted like water. No that is not what happened.

Bu it was one thing being changed into another that is what the comparison was about.

But in the Catholic miracle you have something that is said to change, but it can’t be perceived. It deceives the senses. It pretends to be something it is not.

There is no pretending it does change to the Body and Blood. Jesus did not say here is bread and I pretend it is my Body nor did He say here is the cup that I pretend is my Blood. Jesus said this IS.

Now, Jesus never did a miracle that was not perfectly evident and undeniable. Why would He now do something that is a lie on the surface?

Careful this borders on disrespect of our faith. Many walked away just because they could not understand and trust Jesus’ word.

That is really not worthy of God. God is capable of actually changing things in a way we can perceive. It is not hard for Him.

So you decide what is worthy of God

For instance, if I am saved, but I still curse and steal and drink, I am not really changed and my alleged salvation is a lie because there is no change. God’s work always produces a real change that we can see.

Shalom,
Jerry

You are never saved until you draw your last breath and are judged. Are you saying you can judge someone else because of what you can see? WOW!

 

[frangiuliano115]

Not fair?
Not logical?

**You are never saved until you draw your last breath and are judged. **Are you saying you can judge someone else because of what you can see? WOW!

Could you explain to me what you mean by the above. I’ve read it 5 times and I still don’t know.

I’m never saved till I draw my last breath.

So if I died right now, I’d be saved?
Was I not saved a minute before I died?

I had a long conversation on this with a Benedictine Brother who teaches the faith and I think we don’t all understand it properly.

We are saved
We are being saved
We will be saved

It means we are saved!

Think about it. I know too many people living in doubt when really we should be very joyful.

Fran
About the change. I’d have to say that Eazyduzit is correct and that we catholics teach the same concept. If one is serving God, there will be some change evident. You know, you shall know a tree by its fruit. Of course, we all have our own speed and our own path. But I leave this to you and Eazy.

 

[benhur]

St. Ignatius of Antioch was the disciple of St. John, apostle and evangelist. Here are a couple of quotes from him.

St. Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, 7, 110 A.D.:

Hifc,

Was he not speaking spiritually of what the Eucharist represents, and not the desire to have /receive communion? We all desire His love. We all desire to more to see and understand Calvary.

Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, Chapter 6, 110 A.D.:

Again some assume no metaphorical speech, or that the figure can be of a reality. of course the figure of the bread is His flesh and the figure of the cup is His shed blood .
Furthermore, he was not speaking to Christians who had symbolic, spiritual or consubstantiation views of communion. Ignatius was speaking of Gnostics and your quote is followed by this:“They are ashamed of the cross; they mock at the passion; they make a jest of the resurrection. They are the offspring of that spirit who is the author of all evil,…”
And preceded by this:“Let no man deceive himself. Both the things which are in heaven, and the glorious angels, and rulers, both visible and invisible, if they believe not in the blood of Christ, shall, in consequence, incur condemnation”.

This is the context- belief in Calvary, not Eucharistic views amongst Christians, for we all believe in the Blood.

Tertullian ( newadvent.org/fathers/03124.htm ,ch#40) in answering Gnostics who who disbelief a bodily Christ on the cross, quite plainly uses the word figure, as in metaphoric language, representing a true reality(Christ bodily died for us)
therealpresence.org/eucharst/father/a5.html#ignatius

“Thus did He now consecrate His blood in wine, who then (by the patriarch) used the figure of wine to describe His blood.Then, having taken the bread and given it to His disciples, He made it His own body, by saying, “This is my body,” that is, the figure of my body… that He so profoundly wished to accomplish the symbol of His own redeeming blood?”

Blessings

 

[benhur]

The last sentence is especially important since St. Paul uses the word “discerning” … recognizing the body of Christ. And the consequences of not discerning the body is condemnation.

And what did Ignatius say is condemnation : “They are ashamed of the cross; they mock at the passion; if they believe not in the blood of Christ, shall, in consequence, incur condemnation”. ? That is not discerning the body. If you take communion and are uncharitable to your brethren, that is not discerning not only the charitableness of Calvary but not discerning the other "body’, ’ the church, fellow believers. Paul was not speaking of interpretations of just how the symbol is related to the reality, but that it is, and we should act accordingly.

Transubstantiation, tho not used until centuries later, it was understood even in Christ’s day. For at Cana he changed the 125 gallons of water into wine. Christ changed one substance into another. So too at the last supper, he changed the wine into his blood, the substance of wine became the substance of another…the blood of Christ. As Christ changed the water at Cana, he changed the wine at Jerusalem.

Understand that Christ can do anything but this is apples to oranges. It would be more like turning wine into coffee, though the "accidents’ of wine still exists. That is, the Cana new wine had zero appearance and taste of water but 100% like wine, and today the bread does not taste like flesh nor the wine taste like blood… Please excuse my graphic detail of what I believe precious, sanctified communion is or is not.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

St. Ignatius of Antioch was the disciple of St. John, apostle and evangelist. Here are a couple of quotes from him.

Ignatius twice mentions, " Take heed, then, often to come together to give thanks to God, and show forth His praise". He makes no mention of offering up a sacrifice to God,or representing the sacrifice. It seems to strictly give thanksgiving for what God has offered us, thru Calvary.

Blessings

 

[frangiuliano115]

Hi Benhur,

I’ve been following along but don’t have a lot to say on this.

Never the twain shall meet on this one.

I’m told that we have to decide between John 6 verse 44 and 54.

Do you agree?

Why can’t it be both? First 44, we’re saved. Then 54.

I also see it as literal - apart from the fact that my religious affiliation is Catholic, I do like to understand what I believe. I’m kind of stuck on 60 and 66. Why did some disciples abandon Him?

I will also assert that I like to stick to the bible for my support.

Fran

 

[TonyBS]

Hi Benhur,

I’ve been following along but don’t have a lot to say on this.

Never the twain shall meet on this one.

I’m told that we have to decide between John 6 verse 44 and 54.

Do you agree?

Why can’t it be both? First 44, we’re saved. Then 54.

I also see it as literal - apart from the fact that my religious affiliation is Catholic, I do like to understand what I believe. I’m kind of stuck on 60 and 66. Why did some disciples abandon Him?

I will also assert that I like to stick to the bible for my support.

Fran

I have not followed this for a while. But your statement was interesting when I looked up the passages.

Dear Fran I see we accept both John 6:44 and John 6:54. The issue in these passages is who is the Father. Will leave it there.

God bless and regards Tony

 

[TonyBS]

Could you explain to me what you mean by the above. I’ve read it 5 times and I still don’t know.

I’m never saved till I draw my last breath.

So if I died right now, I’d be saved?
Was I not saved a minute before I died?

I had a long conversation on this with a Benedictine Brother who teaches the faith and I think we don’t all understand it properly.

We are saved
We are being saved
We will be saved

It means we are saved!

Think about it. I know too many people living in doubt when really we should be very joyful.

Fran
About the change. I’d have to say that Eazyduzit is correct and that we catholics teach the same concept. If one is serving God, there will be some change evident. You know, you shall know a tree by its fruit. Of course, we all have our own speed and our own path. But I leave this to you and Eazy.

Dear Fran - The being Saved has had “strange” developments in christianity over the years.

The following Comments;

Not fair?
Not logical?

You are never saved until you draw your last breath and are judged. Are you saying you can judge someone else because of what you can see? WOW!

This is supported in the Baha’i Faith by this quote;

“He should forgive the sinful, and never despise his low estate, for none knoweth what his own end shall be. How often hath a sinner attained, at the hour of death, to the essence of faith, and, quaffing the immortal draught, hath taken his flight unto the Concourse on high! And how often hath a devout believer, at the hour of his soul’s ascension, been so changed as to fall into the nethermost fire!”

Link to quote - reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/GWB/gwb-125.html

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[frangiuliano115]

Dear Fran - The being Saved has had “strange” developments in christianity over the years.

The following Comments;

This is supported in the Baha’i Faith by this quote;

“He should forgive the sinful, and never despise his low estate, for none knoweth what his own end shall be. How often hath a sinner attained, at the hour of death, to the essence of faith, and, quaffing the immortal draught, hath taken his flight unto the Concourse on high! And how often hath a devout believer, at the hour of his soul’s ascension, been so changed as to fall into the nethermost fire!”

Link to quote - reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/GWB/gwb-125.html

God Bless and Regards Tony

Hi Tony,

I read the link. I don’t understand about the love part at the beginning. Unless it means that we’re not to love anything or anyone more than God because only then can you love everything else. This is also a concept in Christianity. Loving can take you away from God if it’s meant in this sense.

As far as saving. Jesus meant us also to be saved in this life. He said the Kingdom is all around us but we do not see it unless we are born again. John 3. He meant for man to be so transformed as to cause a real change in this life. It seems to have happened to a degree. We are much more civil than we were hundreds of years ago. We care more about our fellow humans in the sense that we donate money and food to help out. I don’t think this was in the minds of people in the old times because they had nothing left over and could think only of their own survival.

Now, I do find it a bit strange that in Catholicism many believe that we are not saved till the last moment. Could I clarify what I mean?

We can be saved at the last moment of life. Augustine said something I like a lot: Many inside the fold are out, and many outside the fold are in. I’m not saying that salvation cannot occur at the very last moment of one’s life. But I also don’t agree that we cannot know now that we are saved, in the sense that it has come to mean today. Saved to be with God at the end of our lives. I believe we can know it. How else could we live a joyous life thinking we might end up away from God’s presence? That would be hell indeed!

So many Catholics I know tell me they cannot know for sure. Then what was the N.T. all about? Why did Paul have so much to say? Why did Jesus have to die?

Then there are those who feel everyone will be saved in the end.
Then there are those who believe being saved is extremely difficult. To me it’s just believing in Jesus and following Him.

“for none knoweth what his own end shall be” means in this life, not the next. As Frank Sinatra said. you could be riding high in April, shot down in May. Yes. I really believe this. Pride is at the base of most sins.

Fran

 

[PJM]

God Bless you too Patrick have a Blessed Christmas and continue your great post into the New Year.

And to you and your’s my friend!

 

[PJM]

Could you explain to me what you mean by the above. I’ve read it 5 times and I still don’t know.

I’m never saved till I draw my last breath.

So if I died right now, I’d be saved?
Was I not saved a minute before I died?

I had a long conversation on this with a Benedictine Brother who teaches the faith and I think we don’t all understand it properly.

We are saved
We are being saved
We will be saved

It means we are saved!

Think about it. I know too many people living in doubt when really we should be very joyful.

Fran
About the change. I’d have to say that Eazyduzit is correct and that we catholics teach the same concept. If one is serving God, there will be some change evident. You know, you shall know a tree by its fruit. Of course, we all have our own speed and our own path. But I leave this to you and Eazy.

It means that:

One’s salvation CAN BE lost right up to the last breath &

Salvation can be merited right up to one’s Last Breath.

[The sin of] Presumption CAN easily lead to damnation

To PRAY daily “for a happy death” IS a most worthy habit to acquire:thumbsup:

 

[benhur]

Hi Benhur,

I’ve been following along but don’t have a lot to say on this.

Never the twain shall meet on this one.

I’m told that we have to decide between John 6 verse 44 and 54.

Do you agree?

Why can’t it be both? First 44, we’re saved. Then 54.

I also see it as literal - apart from the fact that my religious affiliation is Catholic, I do like to understand what I believe. I’m kind of stuck on 60 and 66. Why did some disciples abandon Him?

I will also assert that I like to stick to the bible for my support.

Fran

Hi fran,

It is absolutely both, and in that order if I may say so.
As far as 60/66, departing disciples, many think they are like todays non-transubstantialists, that it is too hard to believe we have to eat Christ, in any fashion.

I kindly disagree. They had to leave. Jesus pushed the issue with having to “gnaw” on His flesh, which is anathema to the Jewish listeners, and or that of course then Jesus would have to die, which also was disappointing to say the least to these followers hoping for their Davidic King to sit and rule (kicking out Romans, giving them food). That is why Jesus then said, " what? you can’t take me dying, what if I also told you I would ascend back to heaven ?" in vs 62. These were false followers for vs. 64 says, “For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not”, and ch 2:24, “many believed in his name when they saw the miracles. But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew what was in man”. They did not believe properly* before *the John 6 discourse. These false followers had to have their bubble burst, in hopes that they might later truly" be drawn by the Father", and not by fleshly desires, or the devil himself.(Remember, Peter also said Christ would not die but it was Satan speaking thru him, and Satan tempted Christ in the wilderness with the throne now, bypassing Calvary).

John 6 is about truly believing in Christ and His mission (death, resurrection, ascension), and that only by the gift of revelation and faith from the Father. When Peter properly professed this proper ‘following’ , Christ affirmed His choosing them, and ended the discourse. Lesson learned, the eating done (gnawing/believing on Christs words).

Blessings