Sacrifice and Catholic teaching

[SolomonVII]

I am not sure if this is 100% correct. The Eucharist is His glorified body. His body at the last supper and on the cross were not glorified.

.....

Hmm, interesting perspective.
But I don't think that Jesus had two bodies. I think that he had only one.

Please don't think that I am brushing you off with my describing your perspective as interesting.
I do think that there is an interesting historical discussion about some aspects of that perspective that has taken place over whether the Eucharist consists of unleavened or leavened bread.
I left out the part where you saw me as describing the Mass as magical time travel. That part was uninteresting to me, but there is a great discussion to be had of which form of Bread, Risen, or unleavened, best describes the partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ.

Eastern and Western rites have different perspectives on this, but I don't think that either perspective has yet been pronounced heretical by the other.


Leavened Bread vs. Unleavened - Questions & Answers
Leavened vs. Unleavened Bread

You are right, He has only one...
And we are members of that One...

So do you believe Paul?

Col. 1:24
Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you,
and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh
for his Body's sake, which is the Church:

His Body is much more than just Carl, Julie and Fred
who happen agree in their own interpretation of the Bible...

Arsenios

If our ordinary experience of time is experienced as a flow of unique moments progressing and yet both concretely separated from past memory and future potential, our ordinary experience of our bodies as separate and unique from all others is at least as difficult for our minds to overcome.

Experience of time and body in the ordinary sense is necessary aspect of survival in our world. To experience the world through all humans simultaneously, to experience their joys and anxieties and pain as if through one body and as our own experience would be an extraordinary experience, like seeing the face of God.
It is something that would make life as we know it impossible.

There are a few people who have talked about their Near Death experiences as living their lives through the perspective of the others whose lives they have touched, as seeing their life as others have experienced it. For some psychopaths, who had left behind only a trail of destruction and pain, to then experience themselves through others as the pain that they unleashed on the world, was a hellish, and life changing experience.
There is terribleness to Oneness for those of us who sin, when we become the ones that we have wronged during our lives lived separately.

One Body is not how we perceive our body in the here and now, but I think that the ancient Jewish perspective is that all of humanity was contained in Adam and therefore all were present in the Garden at the Fall. We are all the first Adam in that sense, but to die in Christ as the first Adam is to resurrect in Christ as the Second.
It is a pragmatic matter that we experience ourselves as separate from one another, but the deeper reality is that we are all one in Christ. Once we grasp that truth, even intellectually, we can understand why Jesus would describe the one body union of man and woman in the bonds of Sacred Matrimony as being redundant in heaven. Our bonds in the one body of Christ, which is the Church, are much deeper and more profoundly intimate than even the marriage between a man and a woman here on earth ever could be.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

That is exactly what I am saying literal=physical here

Why ?

Do you think that Scripture is wrong somehow ? (that what is invisible is what is important, and never to judge by what is visible (temporal, carnal, flesh) )

 

[ViaCrucis]

Well if it is meant to be literal as you say. Then surely the wine should taste like blood does and the wafer as flesh does. Or else it cannot be literal! You can't have it both ways

Should we expect, if we had a sample of Christ's blood and held it under a microscope to discover His Divinity? Or should we expect to find ordinary human blood?

Christian orthodox teaching says we would see only ordinary human blood--because Jesus Christ is indeed truly man. His Deity is not discernible through the senses, but solely by faith.

So we find in the Supper, of course we find it to be bread and wine--because it is actually bread and wine. The body and blood of the Savior is discerned not by the senses, but by faith alone. On account of the word of Christ who tells us, "This is My body".

-CryptoLutheran

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

Should we expect, if we had a sample of Christ's blood and held it under a microscope to discover His Divinity? Or should we expect to find ordinary human blood?

Christian orthodox teaching says we would see only ordinary human blood--because Jesus Christ is indeed truly man. His Deity is not discernible through the senses, but solely by faith.

So we find in the Supper, of course we find it to be bread and wine--because it is actually bread and wine. The body and blood of the Savior is discerned not by the senses, but by faith alone. On account of the word of Christ who tells us, "This is My body".

-CryptoLutheran

cannot be literal/physical!

 

[Monk Brendan]

Catholics say, that the "sacrifice of the mass", is a representation of Calvary, not a re-sacrifice. But the breakdown of what is happening during the consecration, in the Catholic Encyclopedia, sounds like a separate sacrifice to me. Here is a discussion I was having with a Catholic friend of mine-

Okay, please bear with me on this. First of all, if you are talking about the Mass, the word is spelled CANON. Just one N.

The Sacrifice of the Mass is a mystical event that draws the believer back in time to the Last Supper, where Jesus is speaking the words, "This is my Body, This is my Blood," where he is clearly telling the Apostles that this bread will become His Body, etc.

Then, we are brought forward to the actual crucifixion, where we see the blood pouring forth from Jesus, and we see Him die on the cross.

This all happens within the church building, time passes, and the world goes on. However, we are fed the Eternal Bread and Blood, that we have seen (with spiritual eyes) just re-enacted on the Altar.

So, the Eucharist is really the Body and Blood of Christ, as we have just see from the Last Supper and the Crucifixion.

 

[Monk Brendan]

Should we expect, if we had a sample of Christ's blood and held it under a microscope to discover His Divinity? Or should we expect to find ordinary human blood?

No, you will only see bread and wine.

 

[Monk Brendan]

How can Catholics allow this to be in the Encyclopedia?

I did not! But no one asked me.

 

[Arsenios]

cannot be literal/physical!

Is both!

Arsenios

 

[Monk Brendan]

Because they are terrified that if the Catholic Church is true.....they’re wrong.

Too True

 

[Monk Brendan]

Notice also that Catholic posters put on the defensive rarely prove any critic to be wrong.

Okay Albion, What exactly do you want proven right?

 

[Albion]

Not to upset this parade, but the doctrine we call Real Presence in no way requires the elements to change into the physical, carnal, literal flesh and blood of Christ, just that the bread and wine acquire, in some way or other, the bona fide presence of the Lord.

EDIT: This is in response to the exchange that is now half a dozen or more posts back.

 

[Monk Brendan]

I suspect they are war-weary...
Badly treated and illegitimate children often enjoy war...
The results do not change hearts...

Fr. Arsenios, master bless.

But who, exactly are the illegitimate children that are so war weary?

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

Is both!

Arsenios

You have quoted when Jesus says "this IS My body...blood", where "is" in the Greek is "ἐστι". When the bread and wine are distributed in Church, and the recipients eat and drink, at what time do these actually BECOME the body/blood of Jesus Christ? Is it when consumed in the body? If so, than "ἐστι" is the wrong Greek word, as a "change" take place, which would require, "ἀλλάσσω"! Jesus NEVER said to anyone that bread and wine would CHANGE (ἀλλάσσω) into anything, at any time. So, where is this "teaching" from, since Jesus Himself says only "ἐστι", which indeed can be taken as "symbolic", and not "ἀλλάσσω"! This is conclusive that the RC teaching on Transubstantiation is not anywhere in the Bible!

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

Not to upset this parade, but the doctrine we call Real Presence in no way requires the elements to change into the physical, carnal, literal flesh and blood of Christ, just that the bread and wine acquire, in some way or other, the bona fide presence of the Lord.

EDIT: This is in response to the exchange that is now half a dozen or more posts back.

not so! the RC teaching on Transubstantiation means exactly that, the bead and wine CHANGE into the body/blood of Jesus Christ!

 

[Albion]

Isn't it more the case that the actual wording used could reasonably be understood either way--refers to/represents his body or...is his body? If that's so, we must consider the rest of Scripture in order to decide.

 

[Albion]

not so! the RC teaching on Transubstantiation means exactly that, the bead and wine CHANGE into the body/blood of Jesus Christ!

I wasn't talking about Transubstantiation.

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

Too True

Too WRONG! Most of the RC dogma is NOT from the Bible, like Mary being sinless, where the Bible very clearly says that she "rejoiced in God my Saviour"! (Luke 1:47). If she were "sinless" why the need of a SAVIOUR?

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

I wasn't talking about Transubstantiation.

Thats what all this discussion is about!

 

[Arsenios]

Please don't think that I am brushing you off with my describing your perspective as interesting.
I do think that there is an interesting historical discussion about some aspects of that perspective that has taken place over whether the Eucharist consists of unleavened or leavened bread.
I left out the part where you saw me as describing the Mass as magical time travel. That part was uninteresting to me, but there is a great discussion to be had of which form of Bread, Risen, or unleavened, best describes the partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ.

Eastern and Western rites have different perspectives on this, but I don't think that either perspective has yet been pronounced heretical by the other.


Leavened Bread vs. Unleavened - Questions & Answers
Leavened vs. Unleavened Bread

If our ordinary experience of time is experienced as a flow of unique moments progressing and yet both concretely separated from past memory and future potential, our ordinary experience of our bodies as separate and unique from all others is at least as difficult for our minds to overcome.

Experience of time and body in the ordinary sense is necessary aspect of survival in our world. To experience the world through all humans simultaneously, to experience their joys and anxieties and pain as if through one body and as our own experience would be an extraordinary experience, like seeing the face of God.
It is something that would make life as we know it impossible.

There are a few people who have talked about their Near Death experiences as living their lives through the perspective of the others whose lives they have touched, as seeing their life as others have experienced it. For some psychopaths, who had left behind only a trail of destruction and pain, to then experience themselves through others as the pain that they unleashed on the world, was a hellish, and life changing experience.
There is terribleness to Oneness for those of us who sin, when we become the ones that we have wronged during our lives lived separately.

One Body is not how we perceive our body in the here and now, but I think that the ancient Jewish perspective is that all of humanity was contained in Adam and therefore all were present in the Garden at the Fall. We are all the first Adam in that sense, but to die in Christ as the first Adam is to resurrect in Christ as the Second.
It is a pragmatic matter that we experience ourselves as separate from one another, but the deeper reality is that we are all one in Christ. Once we grasp that truth, even intellectually, we can understand why Jesus would describe the one body union of man and woman in the bonds of Sacred Matrimony as being redundant in heaven. Our bonds in the one body of Christ, which is the Church, are much deeper and more profoundly intimate than even the marriage between a man and a woman here on earth ever could be.

I can't tell you how good it is to see an almost-Orthodox Roman Catholic here...

We begin in small dosages - Simple inward directed prophesy - Knowing the heart of our brother, in all its diversity of good and evil - And in seeking within that knowing a helpful word or deed... Not always succeeding... The whole of it will come later, and there are degrees of vision according to our deeds and God's purposing... That is why this is a Faith, and not an impirico-logical structuring of belief according to written words... As the Solas embrace in their struggle against the involuntary imposition of the apostatic Papalists... You guys arguing back and forth is a veritable family feud worthy of a miniseries on NetFlix...

I understand that the current Pope is proclaiming some heretical (by R/C standards) view these days, and the Latin Church is having some issues as a result - Haven't researched it yet... Do you know about it?

Arsenios

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

I can't tell you how good it is to see an almost-Orthodox Roman Catholic here...

We begin in small dosages - Simple inward directed prophesy - Knowing the heart of our brother, in all its diversity of good and evil - And in seeking within that knowing a helpful word or deed... Not always succeeding... The whole of it will come later, and there are degrees of vision according to our deeds and God's purposing... That is why this is a Faith, and not an impirico-logical structuring of belief according to written words... As the Solas embrace in their struggle against the involuntary imposition of the apostatic Papalists... You guys arguing back and forth is a veritable family feud worthy of a miniseries on NetFlix...

I understand that the current Pope is proclaiming some heretical (by R/C standards) view these days, and the Latin Church is having some issues as a result - Haven't researched it yet... Do you know about it?

Arsenios

if the "pope" is proclaiming something that is considered as "heretical", then surely he cannot be infallible, as the RC church teaches?