That’s quite true. Last time I looked, there was a difference between symbolism and being literal.no they do not, they think it is a symbolization of the body and blood. But if they would study, the early church fathers along with there Bible, they could figure it out
Consubstantiation is different. It means that:Consubstantiation means that The Bread and Wine are litrally The Body and Blood of Christ. The idea that they are merely symbolic is a Sacrementarianist error.
The gospel writers called it bread because it is bread.
Jesus called it his body because it is his body.
That is the simple way of putting consubstantiation.
Those who say it is symbolic, Luther called Sacramentarianists.
Sacramentarianists are in error because the bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ.
Aren’t I a good Anglican?
Same to Catholics. Jesus is present sacrementaly, not physically.
Actually, we believe Christ is physically present, though not in a full human form. Christ told us “this is my body” and “this is my blood”. We trust that he will sort out the details of making it so.
Did you figure that out yet?
Once again I will reiterate what I said, considering it seems to have gone unnoticed. There is a difference between the two doctrines although it’s not a giant difference, it is there.
Yes but both beliefs proclaim that they are the body and blood of Christ.
True, my point was there is a difference.
For Catholics the Eucharist is sacrificial. Jesus’ Body and Blood was shed once for all, but what we offer on the altar is His sacrificed and resurrected Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity. Jesus is not divided or diminished by this offering of His Body and Blood.
True.
Why do you need to offer his own body and blood back to him, what does that do?
It is the same offering to the Father that was made on Calvary. Not another offering, not a repeated offering, not a later offering. The same offering as done at Calvary, re-presented at each altar, at the hands of the priest, as *alter Christus *. As eternity and history intersect. The same offering. The very same.
Dear me no, the priest doesn’t turn into Jesus. He acts in His role, to rep-resent the sacrifice. A function of apostolic sucession, and the Sacrament of Orders. As defined by the Church.
But you just said the sacrifice isn’t repeated, everything is actually transported in time and everything is really what it is, wine and bread are really blood and flesh. That must also apply to the priest else it is just a repeat of sacrifice over and over again right?
Nope. The priest is the alter Christus, not the Christus, by virtue of the Apostolic Succession.
