- Oct 28, 2006
- 24,962
- 11,709
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
I don't object to Transubstantiation, I just don't believe it's real. That's all...
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Some object to Transubstantiation; but what do the objectors think it means?
Here's a chance to expound on the theme, explain its alleged errors, offer your own definition of the word, and establish the credibility of your stance. Have at it.
I am so happy you brought St Francis in. I have been back into his life and spirituality lately. I agree, in his view all creation manifests the creator. But sacred scripture and the sacraments have special place without need of explanation.St. Francis seems to have had something more like a Lutheran doctrine of the sacrament:
Note the words "ordinary bread".
Modern Roman Catholics have sometimes mangled his words when quoting this letter, but for Francis, who was a mystic who spoke of nature as "brother" and "sister", matter was diaphanous to the divine, and did not require transmutation into something else to communicate God's grace.
I was just reading his Admonitions today and he makes an analogy. Those who did not recognize the divinity of Jesus but could only recognize his flesh are similar to those who can only see the bread and wine and are blind to the divinity.St. Francis seems to have had something more like a Lutheran doctrine of the sacrament:
Note the words "ordinary bread".
Modern Roman Catholics have sometimes mangled his words when quoting this letter, but for Francis, who was a mystic who spoke of nature as "brother" and "sister", matter was diaphanous to the divine, and did not require transmutation into something else to communicate God's grace.
Saint Francis believed that the Holy Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ.I was just reading his Admonitions today and he makes an analogy. Those who did not recognize the divinity of Jesus but could only recognize his flesh are similar to those who can only see the bread and wine and are blind to the divinity.
8All those who saw the Lord Jesus according to the humanity, therefore, and did not see and believe according to the Spirit and the Divinity that He is the true Son of God were condemned. 9Now in the same way, all who see the sacrament sanctified by the words of the Lord upon the altar at the hands of the priest in the form of bread and wine, and who do not see and believe according to the Spirit and the Divinity that it is truly the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, are condemned. 10[This] is affirmed by the Most High Himself Who says, This is my Body and the Blood of my new covenant [which will be shed for many] (Mk 14:22, 24); 11and Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life (Jn 6:55). 12It is the Spirit of the Lord, therefore, That lives in Its faithful, That receives the Body and Blood of the Lord. 13All others who do not share in this same Spirit and presume to receive Him eat and drink judgment on themselves (1Cor 11:29).
I should have continued.Saint Francis believed that the Holy Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ.
I don't object to Transubstantiation, I just don't believe it's real. That's all...
I should have continued.
19 As He revealed Himself to the holy apostles in true flesh, so He reveals Himself to us now in sacred bread. 20And as they saw only His flesh by an insight of their flesh, yet believed that He was God as they contemplated Him with their spiritual eyes, 21let us, as we see bread and wine with our bodily eyes, see and firmly believe that they are His most holy Body and Blood living and true. 22And in this way the Lord is always with His faithful, as He Himself says: Behold I am with you until the end of the age (Mt 28:20).
I object to it because the doctrine states that the bread and wine cease to exist, and are instead replaced only with an appearance of bread and wine. This abolishes the nature of a sacrament, because the nature of a sacrament involves real physical creatures participating as signs with what they represent.
I will comment if you give a verse that you use in the BIBLE >>Some object to Transubstantiation; but what do the objectors think it means?
Here's a chance to expound on the theme, explain its alleged errors, offer your own definition of the word, and establish the credibility of your stance. Have at it.
I can respect that position even though I do not share it.I don't object to Transubstantiation, I just don't believe it's real. That's all...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?