How to convince R. Catholics that the ('host' wafer) is not Christs flesh and bone?

Already cited the Didache. Already cited Ignatious (indirectly). Already cited Irenaeus. Here't Theophilus.

Click to expand...

the didache didn't support your position. Also, I know that the early Romans accused the early Christians of cannibalism, because they had no understanding of the trans-substancial natural of Christ, they did not know that it was hidden under the mystery of the bread and wine, rather they thought the Christians were eating the flesh of other humans in rituals.. They thought Christians were committing a bloody sacrifice, which they weren't...

If anything the idea of the Romans to think that Christians were cannibals showed the prevalence that the Christians did truly believe the bread and wine became the body and blood of Christ. They just didn't understand the transforming nature of it or the material aspects. Otherwise they would not have accused them of such. The Eucharist is still a mystery, like the Trinity. So in reality your support kinda goes against you. If it was just a symbol, the Romans would have had no reason to accuse the Christians of cannibalism, would they??

Didache c90
"On the Lord's own day, assemble in common to break bread and offer thanks. But first confess your sins so that your sacrifice may be pure. However, no one quarreling with his brother may join your meeting until they are reconciled; your sacrifice must not be defiled (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, 14)."

Secundulus said:

I am unsure why you use this to support your theory? The Didache calls it a sacrifice which is anathema to Protestants.

Click to expand...

Hbr. 13:15-16
By him (Jesus) therefore let us (you and me) offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of [our] lips giving thanks to his name. But to do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.

The Didache is saying the same thing as Hbr. 13:15.

By Him -- our sacrifice of praise is offered and God is well pleased.

Ps. 107:22 And let them sacrifice the sacrifices of thanksgiving, and declare his works with rejoicing.

CreedIsChrist said:

That isn't cool jazmyn what you did..

Click to expand...

Sorry. Called not being familiar with why it's in different verses in different versions.

Jazmyn said:

Sorry. Called not being familiar with why it's in different verses in different versions.

Click to expand...

What post are you referencing? Thanks

Jazmyn said:

Sorry. Called not being familiar with why it's in different verses in different versions.

Click to expand...

That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. I can see why it would cause confusion.

Jazmyn said:

Sorry. Called not being familiar with why it's in different verses in different versions.

Click to expand...

it happens, welcome to GT

Standing Up said:

Thank you for that. Nice to see someone else understanding poor, twisted Ignatius' words within the context he wrote them. --against gnostics who denied God Incarnate.

Here's a couple more.

Didache c90
"On the Lord's own day, assemble in common to break bread and offer thanks. But first confess your sins so that your sacrifice may be pure. However, no one quarreling with his brother may join your meeting until they are reconciled; your sacrifice must not be defiled (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, 14)."

As long as we argue about this, the Didache says defiled.

.

Click to expand...

Argue all you want but I cited the testimony of Protestant Historical and Patristic scholars above acknowledging that the Catholic position was the one espoused in the ancient Church and throughout much of the 1500 years before the Reformation. Schaff and Kelly are respected experts in Patristic writings.

Trento said:

Schaff and Kelly are respected experts in Patristic writings.

Click to expand...

Standing Up just quoted Schaff:

Standing Up said:

Theophilus c175 bishop of Antioch
Nor indeed was there any necessity for my refuting these, except that I see you still in dubiety about the word of the truth. For though yourself prudent, you endure fools gladly. Otherwise you would not have been moved by senseless men to yield yourself to empty words, and to give credit to the prevalent rumor wherewith godless lips falsely accuse us, who are worshippers of God, and are called Christians, alleging that the wives of us all are held in common and made promiscuous use of; and that we even commit incest with our own sisters, and, what is most impious and barbarous of all, that we eat human flesh.

640640 [The body of Christ is human flesh. If, then, it had been the primitive doctrine, that the bread and wine cease to exist in the Eucharist, and are changed into natural flesh and blood, our author could not have resented this charge as “most barbarous and impious.”]

But further, they say that our doctrine has but recently come to light, and that we have nothing to allege in proof of what we receive as truth, nor of our teaching, but that our doctrine is foolishness. I wonder, then, chiefly that you, who in other matters are studious, and a scrutinizer of all things, give but a careless hearing to us. For, if it were possible for you, you would not grudge to spend the night in the libraries.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.iii.iv.html

Click to expand...

catzrfluffy said:

Standing Up just quoted Schaff:

Click to expand...

Schaff is well received within the RCC, much like Protestant turned RC Scott Hahn is.

I haven't read on either one of those myself nor do I ever desire to ehehe.......

http://www.christianforums.com/t7401264-20/#post52917390
Scott Hahn's Jouney To Catholicism

catzrfluffy said:

[/color][/b]
Standing Up just quoted Schaff:
[/size][/font]

Click to expand...

That doesn't contradict real presence at all. The Pagans were accusing the Christians of killing and eating people. That is what he is addressing.

Secundulus said:

That doesn't contradict real presence at all. The Pagans were accusing the Christians of killing and eating people. That is what he is addressing.

Click to expand...

Perhaps the cannibal pagans misread the Bible

Deut 28:26 and becomes carcass of thee to food for every flyer of the heavens, and for beast of the land, and there is none causing trembling.
[Ezekiel 39:17/Reve 19:17]

Eucharisted said:

And He isn't eating or drinking the Eucharist. He IS the Eucharist. Nor would He need to eat or drink after His Resurrection. So your point is invalid.

Click to expand...

Yes. It's really a matter of faith in believing what Christ said about the bread and wine being His Body and Blood, imo.

So we are to have blind faith?

MamaZ said:

So we are to have blind faith?

Click to expand...

There is nothing blind here. Christ said what He said, His Church agrees with Him, and always has.

Some men in the sixteenth century and some men now think they know better.

Blind faith? In what Christ says and His Church has always taught, or in what a few men later thought He meant?

peace,

Anglian

MamaZ said:

So we are to have blind faith?

Click to expand...

John 20
29Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."


Jesus will give you faith in his real presence in the Eucharist if you ask him for it.

Ask Jesus for the faith to believe his words.

If one has to question Jesus Himself in order to justify one's own beliefs about His words, perhaps one should begin to question one's whole methodology?

peace,

Anglian

chestertonrules said:

John 20
29Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."


Jesus will give you faith in his real presence in the Eucharist if you ask him for it.

Ask Jesus for the faith to believe his words.

Click to expand...

Yes.

Anglian said:

If one has to question Jesus Himself in order to justify one's own beliefs about His words, perhaps one should begin to question one's whole methodology?

peace,

Anglian

Click to expand...

It's a common trick used by antichrists. Most don't realize the methodology is false.

I can speak only for me, but I am a sinner.

I can read the Bible and I can come up with all sorts of interpretations of it, and I can convince myself that I am right; I could even try to convince others. But I am a sinner.

I prefer to test my understandings against that of two thousand years, and where it and I are at variance, I pray for the humility to renounce my pride and accept that the Church may just know more about this than I do.

peace,

Anglian

Eucharisted said:

It's a common trick used by antichrists. Most don't realize the methodology is false.

Click to expand...

Well, LLoJ, it looks like you and I are now antichrists.