The Roman Catholic Eucharistic Christ and the Jesus of the Bible

romishpopishorganist said:
No, the RCC doctrine of the Eucharist is based on what the Scriptures teach
Click to expand...
No, that is incorrect.
Actually one cannot fully comprehend the meaning of the doctrine of the Eucharist without understanding the Roman Catholic Church's term of 'transubstantiation,' which was a created word that was approved by the Council of Trent in order to express the changing by a Roman Catholic priest of the entire substances of bread and wine into the actual Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, a result of a performance that the Scriptures do not teach.
 
RayneBeau said:
No, that is incorrect.
Click to expand...
Um, no, it isn't. It is quite correct.
RayneBeau said:
Actually one cannot fully comprehend the meaning of the doctrine of the Eucharist without understanding the Roman Catholic Church's term of 'transubstantiation,' which was a created word that was approved by the Council of Trent in order to express the changing by a Roman Catholic priest of the entire substances of bread and wine into the actual Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, a result of a performance that the Scriptures do not teach.
Click to expand...
What the Scriptures teach is "This IS my body."

Are you Bill Clinton? Do I need to explain to you what "is" means?
 
romishpopishorganist said:
That depends on what you mean by "difference."

It is one and the same Jesus Christ. In that sense, there is no difference.

The difference does not lie in WHO and WHAT is present, the difference lies in the MODE of how Christ is present. The Jesus of the Bible walked the earth according to earthly flesh, then after the resurrection, glorified flesh. What is present in the Eucharist is not the earthly flesh of Christ, but the glorified flesh of Christ according to Sacrament. This is to say, it is one and the same Christ that is present-----but according to substance, not accidents.
Click to expand...
I've got some Ocean-Front property in Kansas that you might be interested in -

But HEY!! when I was younger, the Catholics used to give out Wafers AND Wine - even had a "Gun" that shot the wafer and some wine into your mouth. Until they suddenly decided the the wine was no longer necessary, and the wafer did the job all by itself. JUST THINK of the money they saved with that little "adjustment".
 
Bob Carabbio said:
I've got some Ocean-Front property in Kansas that you might be interested in -

But HEY!! when I was younger, the Catholics used to give out Wafers AND Wine - even had a "Gun" that shot the wafer and some wine into your mouth.
Click to expand...
I never heard of a "gun" that shoots wine and wafers. In the Eastern Rites they use a spoon and "flick" the host and wine into a person's mouth, but in the Western Rite, I never heard of no gun before.
Bob Carabbio said:
Until they suddenly decided the the wine was no longer necessary, and the wafer did the job all by itself. JUST THINK of the money they saved with that little "adjustment".
Click to expand...
Because of the doctrine of concomitance, reception of Christ under the sign of wine alone, or bread alone is sufficient. Christ's body and blood is not divided, thus, reception of one entails reception of the other.

The reason for reception of both signs---only concerns the fuller experience of the Sacramental ceremony and signs.
 
romishpopishorganist said:
Not meant to be taken literally?

Good. I do not take "All have sinned...." literally.
Click to expand...
Oh we know you don't. If you take the bread and wine literally, then Mary has sinned thank you for bringing that to my attention, Peter is Satan, Herod is a real fox, Jesus is a gate (maybe you should eat gates).

But Jesus was at a symbolic meal, all the food was symbolic on the table even the wine and all of sudden the RCC decide one part is literal. They do this even though it would mean Jesus was getting His apostles to break the commandments and it was Jesus who said that not a jot or a tittle of the Law will disappear. There in lies the big problem for RCs, they have made Jesus unreliable.

Matt 5:18

For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
 
romishpopishorganist said:
I never heard of a "gun" that shoots wine and wafers. In the Eastern Rites they use a spoon and "flick" the host and wine into a person's mouth, but in the Western Rite, I never heard of no gun before.
Click to expand...
They used the pneumatic "gun" at St. Joseph's Parish in Holbrook, MA (my home town), but found that it choked people (My wife being one) so it went away quickly. This WAS the late '50s-early '60s when my wife was still Catholic. She became Pentecostal (Assembly of God) in '63.
romishpopishorganist said:
Because of the doctrine of concomitance, reception of Christ under the sign of wine alone, or bread alone is sufficient. Christ's body and blood is not divided, thus, reception of one entails reception of the other.
Click to expand...
Yup, that's the "Work around" I heard. Naturally the more expensive (and potentially messier) element would be the one dropped.
Rome always has a "Work around" for what they do.
 
Bob Carabbio said:
They used the pneumatic "gun" at St. Joseph's Parish in Holbrook, MA (my home town), but found that it choked people (My wife being one) so it went away quickly. This WAS the late '50s-early '60s when my wife was still Catholic. She became Pentecostal (Assembly of God) in '63.

Yup, that's the "Work around" I heard. Naturally the more expensive (and potentially messier) element would be the one dropped.
Rome always has a "Work around" for what they do.
Click to expand...

I was inaccurate about the "Gun" - it WAS NOT used by the Roman Catholics at Saint Joe's. It was used by the Local Greek Orthodox church where my wife went with friends. St Joe's (and Most precious blood in Hyde park MA) only gave the wafer.
 
Bob Carabbio said:
They used the pneumatic "gun" at St. Joseph's Parish in Holbrook, MA (my home town), but found that it choked people (My wife being one) so it went away quickly. This WAS the late '50s-early '60s when my wife was still Catholic. She became Pentecostal (Assembly of God) in '63.
Click to expand...
There was a lot of liturgical nonsense that went on prior to and following Vatican II. There were a lot of liturgical fads that developed.
Bob Carabbio said:
Yup, that's the "Work around" I heard. Naturally the more expensive (and potentially messier) element would be the one dropped.
Rome always has a "Work around" for what they do.
Click to expand...
That is not a "work around" it is the truth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top