bread and wine or "eucharist"

[DPMartin]

for the record, scripture never calls the "bread and wine" known as communion, holy, sacred, or a sacrifice.

Here is the highlight of the reason the reasoning of the institution of the most “holy Sacrifice of the Mass”, as mentioned in documents such as the Console of Trent session 22 is in error.


Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,


There are no additional sacrifices even in the case Paul mentions in Hebrews (10:26) so there is no justification scripturally that states what is called the “most holy Sacrifice of the Mass” as defined in Console of Trent session 22. There are no more sacrifices to be performed other than one’s self (Rom_12:1) whereas in Console of Trent session 22 ch 1 states:

“His priesthood was not to be extinguished by His death, in the last supper, on the night in which He was betrayed,--that He might leave, to His own beloved Spouse the Church, a visible sacrifice, such as the nature of man requires, whereby that bloody sacrifice, once to be accomplished on the cross, might be represented, and the memory thereof remain even unto the end of the world, and its salutary virtue be applied to the remission of those sins which we daily commit.”

So what is communion, has been used for the justification of a priesthood claiming the rite to sacrifice, to “be applied to the remission of those sins which we daily commit”.


Communion by definition is sharing or holding in common with others; participation; the condition of things so held, community, combination, union.


And in all instances mentioned by Paul who’s the only Apostle to mention the “bread” in the context of Christ, states in the sharing thereof is communion. The, offering of the body and blood God ward has been done once and only once. Therefore, there is no such other offering unto God as to the Body and Blood of Christ. Therefore, what is understood as communion scripturally, is Not a sacrifice. Its the partaking of that one and only sacrifice, the sacrifice is over, there is only the partaking left to do.


1Co 10:15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. 18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?

Hence how can a priest offer up what has the Presence of God to God. Not happening. No one offered Christ, but Christ Himself, who is any soul to dare say they offer Christ, the Son of God as a sacrifice unto God, by claiming His presence in what they call the Eucharist that they say is a sacrifice?

 

[Davy]

Communion is done in remembrance of Christ's death on the cross, and to commune with Him.

1 Cor 11:25-32
25 After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, saying, 'This cup is the new testament in My blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me.'
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till He come.
27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
KJV

 

[BreadOfLife]

for the record, scripture never calls the "bread and wine" known as communion, holy, sacred, or a sacrifice.

Here is the highlight of the reason the reasoning of the institution of the most “holy Sacrifice of the Mass”, as mentioned in documents such as the Console of Trent session 22 is in error.

Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

There are no additional sacrifices even in the case Paul mentions in Hebrews (10:26) so there is no justification scripturally that states what is called the “most holy Sacrifice of the Mass” as defined in Console of Trent session 22. There are no more sacrifices to be performed other than one’s self (Rom_12:1) whereas in Console of Trent session 22 ch 1 states:

“His priesthood was not to be extinguished by His death, in the last supper, on the night in which He was betrayed,--that He might leave, to His own beloved Spouse the Church, a visible sacrifice, such as the nature of man requires, whereby that bloody sacrifice, once to be accomplished on the cross, might be represented, and the memory thereof remain even unto the end of the world, and its salutary virtue be applied to the remission of those sins which we daily commit.”

So what is communion, has been used for the justification of a priesthood claiming the rite to sacrifice, to “be applied to the remission of those sins which we daily commit”.

Communion by definition is sharing or holding in common with others; participation; the condition of things so held, community, combination, union.

And in all instances mentioned by Paul who’s the only Apostle to mention the “bread” in the context of Christ, states in the sharing thereof is communion. The, offering of the body and blood God ward has been done once and only once. Therefore, there is no such other offering unto God as to the Body and Blood of Christ. Therefore, what is understood as communion scripturally, is Not a sacrifice. Its the partaking of that one and only sacrifice, the sacrifice is over, there is only the partaking left to do.

1Co 10:15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. 18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?

Hence how can a priest offer up what has the Presence of God to God. Not happening. No one offered Christ, but Christ Himself, who is any soul to dare say they offer Christ, the Son of God as a sacrifice unto God, by claiming His presence in what they call the Eucharist that they say is a sacrifice?

And, for the record - the bread and wine and NOR a holy OR sacred Sacrifice, so I'm not sure where you got that.
What they BECOME is sacred and holy. They become the Body and Blood of Christ. The priest doesn't make this happen - the Holy Spirit does.

As for the Sacrifice of Jesus having happened only once - this is BOTH true AND false.
His sacrifice is ETERNAL (Rev. 13:8). The mass is simply the re-presentation of that SAME sacrifice on Calvary.

In 1 Cor. 11:27-30, Paul speaks to the reality of the Eucharist and the severity of the consequences to those who take this lightly:
“Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying.”

This is pretty harsh language for something that Protestants claim is only a symbol.

The Early Christians were persecuted for their beliefs. The Romans called them "Cannibals" for their belief in the Real Presence and butchered them in every horrible way imaginable . . .

Ignatius of Antioch
Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2-7:1 [A.D. 110]).

Justin Martyr
We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these, but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).

Irenaeus
He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported) how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life — flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord and is in fact a member of him? (Against Heresies 5:2 [A.D. 189]).

Clement of Alexandria
"Eat my flesh)" [Jesus] says, "and drink my blood." The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients, he delivers over his flesh and pours out his blood, and nothing is lacking for the growth of his children (The Instructor of Children 1:6:43:3 [A.D. 191]).

Hippolytus
"And she [Wisdom] has furnished her table" [Proverbs 9:1] . . . refers to his [Christ's] honored and undefiled body and blood, which day by day are administered and offered sacrificially at the spiritual divine table, as a memorial of that first and ever-memorable table of the spiritual divine supper [i.e., the Last Supper] (Fragment from Commentary on Proverbs [A.D. 217]).

Aphraahat
After having spoken thus [at the Last Supper], the Lord rose up from the place where he had made the Passover and had given his body as food and his blood as drink, and he went with his disciples to the place where he was to be arrested. But he ate of his own body and drank of his own blood, while he was pondering on the dead. With His own hands the Lord presented his own body to be eaten, and before he was crucified he gave his blood as drink (Treatises 12:6 [A.D. 340]).

Cyril of Jerusalem
The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ (Catechetical Lectures 19:7 [A.D. 350]).

Augustine
What you see is the bread and the chalice, that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith, yet faith does not desire instruction (ibid. 272).

 

[DPMartin]

And, for the record - the bread and wine and NOR a holy OR sacred Sacrifice, so I'm not sure where you got that.

Console of Trent session 22 says:
"CONCERNING THE THINGS TO BE OBSERVED, AND TO BE AVOIDED, IN THE CELEBRATION OF MASS

FIRST DECREE
What great care is to be taken, that the sacred and holy sacrifice of the mass "

its in the OP "holy Sacrifice of the Mass" is found in Console of Trent session 22 ch 1 and also 2 I o believe also the "Eucharist is called a "Eucharist species" google it. and the CCC refers to this same document in CCC 1373.

correction: that would be CCC 1373 to SC. 7 (SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM ) to Council of Trent, Session XXII, Doctrine on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, c. 2.

What they BECOME is sacred and holy. They become the Body and Blood of Christ. The priest doesn't make this happen - the Holy Spirit does.


In 1 Cor. 11:27-30, Paul speaks to the reality of the Eucharist and the severity of the consequences to those who take this lightly:
“Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying.”

This is pretty harsh language for something that Protestants claim is only a symbol.

the language addresses the "communion" the word used by the Apostles for the sharing and partaking of the bread and wine is representative to those that are partakers in the life and the body of Christ "blood being the life of the body hence Life of Christ" the body yet to be received at resurrection. hence one would be a liar if they participated in an unworthy status, such as not being born of the Holy Spirit, hence under false pretenses. (people don't get ill if they do that today, unless it be spiritually) which in Peter and Paul's day the Lord was enforcing such things.

but there's absolutely no scripture to support any such thing, as the Presence of God (Holy Spirit) is in the bread and wine. no Apostle states such a thing or even implies it, at all.

also there is no scripture teaching, commanding, or instructing, Christians to sacrifice anything other then themselves as an offering up to God. no description of offering bread and wine up to God as a sacrifice. (I've been to a Mass in the recent past and they still do this offering bread and wine up to God as a sacrifice.)


as far as in the order of Melchisedech, he brought the bread and wine to the man of faith hence the faithful but offered up nothing recorded in scripture unto God. no sacrificing activity there. Moses' father in law did when he brought Moses' family to him, and it was recorded, but Melchisedech? no. Jesus brought the bread and the wine His Life and Hid body sustenance essential for the faithful to receive, to live forever in the Presence of God according to the will of God as a Child of God.

 

[DPMartin]

Communion is done in remembrance of Christ's death on the cross, and to commune with Him.

1 Cor 11:25-32
25 After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, saying, 'This cup is the new testament in My blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me.'
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till He come.
27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
KJV

to take part in the communion is to partake of the Life and Body of Christ as a recipient there of. to do this, as Paul says "unworthy" or under false pretenses , not good.

 

[FHII]

to take part in the communion is to partake of the Life and Body of Christ as a recipient there of. to do this, as Paul says "unworthy" or under false pretenses , not good.

Actually, he said unworthily, and it wasn't about doing so under false pretenses.

Paul did say in 1 Cor 11 that when you come together (have Church) is isn't to have the Lord's supper. You are supposed to do that at home; not in Church.

The problem was some folks in the Church at Corinth were bringing food while others didn't have any to bring. Furthermore... They were getting drunk! But again, the problem was lack of concern for the brethren. They were eating while others were hungry.

This is what eating unworthily meant. They didn't discern the Lord's body: the others in the Church.

Even so... Paul did state it wasn't to be done in Church. Folks who do it will undoubtedly justify their actions by saying they aren't gorging themselves and getting drunk and everyone takes equal part. Good point, but he (Paul) said not to do it.

 

[tabletalk]

And, for the record - the bread and wine and NOR a holy OR sacred Sacrifice, so I'm not sure where you got that.
What they BECOME is sacred and holy. They become the Body and Blood of Christ. The priest doesn't make this happen - the Holy Spirit does.

As for the Sacrifice of Jesus having happened only once - this is BOTH true AND false.
His sacrifice is ETERNAL (Rev. 13:8). The mass is simply the re-presentation of that SAME sacrifice on Calvary.

In 1 Cor. 11:27-30, Paul speaks to the reality of the Eucharist and the severity of the consequences to those who take this lightly:
“Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying.”

This is pretty harsh language for something that Protestants claim is only a symbol.

The Early Christians were persecuted for their beliefs. The Romans called them "Cannibals" for their belief in the Real Presence and butchered them in every horrible way imaginable . . .

Ignatius of Antioch
Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2-7:1 [A.D. 110]).

Justin Martyr
We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these, but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).

Irenaeus
He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported) how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life — flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord and is in fact a member of him? (Against Heresies 5:2 [A.D. 189]).

Clement of Alexandria
"Eat my flesh)" [Jesus] says, "and drink my blood." The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients, he delivers over his flesh and pours out his blood, and nothing is lacking for the growth of his children (The Instructor of Children 1:6:43:3 [A.D. 191]).

Hippolytus
"And she [Wisdom] has furnished her table" [Proverbs 9:1] . . . refers to his [Christ's] honored and undefiled body and blood, which day by day are administered and offered sacrificially at the spiritual divine table, as a memorial of that first and ever-memorable table of the spiritual divine supper [i.e., the Last Supper] (Fragment from Commentary on Proverbs [A.D. 217]).

Aphraahat
After having spoken thus [at the Last Supper], the Lord rose up from the place where he had made the Passover and had given his body as food and his blood as drink, and he went with his disciples to the place where he was to be arrested. But he ate of his own body and drank of his own blood, while he was pondering on the dead. With His own hands the Lord presented his own body to be eaten, and before he was crucified he gave his blood as drink (Treatises 12:6 [A.D. 340]).

Cyril of Jerusalem
The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ (Catechetical Lectures 19:7 [A.D. 350]).

Augustine
What you see is the bread and the chalice, that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith, yet faith does not desire instruction (ibid. 272).

Not one of your quotes, from Ignatius to Augustine, means that they thought that the bread and wine were worshipped as being God Himself, physically.

 

[DPMartin]

Actually, he said unworthily, and it wasn't about doing so under false pretenses.

Paul did say in 1 Cor 11 that when you come together (have Church) is isn't to have the Lord's supper. You are supposed to do that at home; not in Church.

The problem was some folks in the Church at Corinth were bringing food while others didn't have any to bring. Furthermore... They were getting drunk! But again, the problem was lack of concern for the brethren. They were eating while others were hungry.

This is what eating unworthily meant. They didn't discern the Lord's body: the others in the Church.

Even so... Paul did state it wasn't to be done in Church. Folks who do it will undoubtedly justify their actions by saying they aren't gorging themselves and getting drunk and everyone takes equal part. Good point, but he (Paul) said not to do it.

thing is this thread is about bread and wine as apposed to Eucharist according to Catholicism, and I didn't quote under false pretenses as a quote of Paul. note the word "or" in that statement.

 

[DPMartin]

Not one of your quotes, from Ignatius to Augustine, means that they thought that the bread and wine were worshipped as being God Himself, physically.

well its in
Sacrosanctum concilium

which is based on
~The Council of Trent - Session 22~

where the line seems to blur, and why I didn't address those references Breadoflife posted. if my memory serves much of that was before the formation of the church, or better said religion of the roman empire the Catholic church.

the counsel of Trent session 22 was in the fall of 1563 after the excommunication of Martin Luther and before the excommunication of Queen Elisabeth session 22 addresses the church's position on the Eucharist that stays the same today, but I haven't found older documentation that supports what they say in session 22.

 

[FHII]

and I didn't quote under false pretenses as a quote of Paul. note the word "or" in that statement.

Yea... You added it. Paul didn't say it. He also didn't say "unworthy".

 

[DPMartin]

Yea... You added it. Paul didn't say it. He also didn't say "unworthy".

really? you're going to argue over that? is there something wrong with you or something? you're going to argue over a type-o and the word "or". WOW, life that bad for you?

 

[FHII]

really? you're going to argue over that? is there something wrong with you or something? you're going to argue over a type-o and the word "or". WOW, life that bad for you?

Ok. Was it really a typo? Am I wrong to think it wasn't a typo? Or was it a case of you misreading?

When you used the word "or" did you really mean it as a "this or that" statement or was it an attempt to define "unworthy" status?
Is that your story and are you sticking to it?

 

[DPMartin]

Ok. Was it really a typo? Am I wrong to think it wasn't a typo? Or was it a case of you misreading?

When you used the word "or" did you really mean it as a "this or that" statement or was it an attempt to define "unworthy" status?
Is that your story and are you sticking to it?

yep, that be a big 10-4. if you have a complaint, see section 1-800-who cares about your problem with that.

 

[FHII]

yep, that be a big 10-4. if you have a complaint, see section 1-800-who cares about your problem with that.

Ok DP... I thought I might have made a mistake. I was hoping we could straighten it out. But your reply just doesn't give me any confidence that such things will happen. So, here we go:

you're going to argue over a type-o

Well here was your typo:

to take part in the communion is to partake of the Life and Body of Christ as a recipient there of. to do this, as Paul says "unworthy" or under false pretenses , not good

Ok. You misspelled unworthily. But there is this:

hence one would be a liar if they participated in an unworthy status, such as not being born of the Holy Spirit, hence under false pretenses

The same typo twice! Ok. Sure, it could happen. But I don't think so. You said "unworthy status". That's wrong but it makes sense as a phrase. "Unworthily starus" doesn't make much sense. "Unworthily" is an adjective. "Unworthy" is an adverb. One describes the way you do something, the other decribes your status.

And you clarified that! You said "unworthy status".

When Paul said they were doimg it unworthily he meant they weren't taking the brethren into account. Some were eating and drinking during the gathering while others were hungry... And that during Church when it wasn't the proper time.

Let's compare some quotes:

hence one would be a liar if they participated in an unworthy status, such as not being born of the Holy Spirit, hence under false pretenses.

Here you say that not being born of the HG is unworthy status. I will dwell on this: "Unworthily" is not a status.

Furthermore, you decribe an example of the unworthy status as not being born by the spirit. And you link that to false pretense.

Thus thwy are not worthy becayse they are not born of the Holy spirit and they are doing it under false pretense... But that is NOTHING like what Paul was saying!

So when you say "or" I have a hard time believin you meant a "this or that" statement. You previously stated "such as..." you falsely quoted "unworthy", linked it to the Holy Ghost (the Spirit of TRUTH) and it isn't the truth!

I won't accuse you of lying, but your statements contradict each other. Cut your losses, pal. Learn some humility and be more care full what you say.

That being said... The Eurchist is just a ritual. Like water baptism. Beautiful and wonderful events. Literally they can be done. But spiritually they are a must.

 

[DPMartin]

Ok DP... I thought I might have made a mistake. I was hoping we could straighten it out. But your reply just doesn't give me any confidence that such things will happen. So, here we go:

Well here was your typo:
Ok. You misspelled unworthily. But there is this:



The same typo twice! Ok. Sure, it could happen. But I don't think so. You said "unworthy status". That's wrong but it makes sense as a phrase. "Unworthily starus" doesn't make much sense. "Unworthily" is an adjective. "Unworthy" is an adverb. One describes the way you do something, the other decribes your status.

And you clarified that! You said "unworthy status".

When Paul said they were doimg it unworthily he meant they weren't taking the brethren into account. Some were eating and drinking during the gathering while others were hungry... And that during Church when it wasn't the proper time.

Let's compare some quotes:
Here you say that not being born of the HG is unworthy status. I will dwell on this: "Unworthily" is not a status.

Furthermore, you decribe an example of the unworthy status as not being born by the spirit. And you link that to false pretense.

Thus thwy are not worthy becayse they are not born of the Holy spirit and they are doing it under false pretense... But that is NOTHING like what Paul was saying!

So when you say "or" I have a hard time believin you meant a "this or that" statement. You previously stated "such as..." you falsely quoted "unworthy", linked it to the Holy Ghost (the Spirit of TRUTH) and it isn't the truth!

I won't accuse you of lying, but your statements contradict each other. Cut your losses, pal. Learn some humility and be more care full what you say.

That being said... The Eurchist is just a ritual. Like water baptism. Beautiful and wonderful events. Literally they can be done. But spiritually they are a must. QUOTE
___________________________________________________________________________________

I count 8 misspelled words in your one posting here, some are repeats, in one posting. so what was it you were accusing me of there FHII, and the reason why?


thing is this thread is about bread and wine as apposed to Eucharist according to Catholicism, and I didn't quote under false pretenses as a quote of Paul. note the word or in that statement, and the quotes around unworthy.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Not one of your quotes, from Ignatius to Augustine, means that they thought that the bread and wine were worshipped as being God Himself, physically.

That is absolutely false.
Tell me which parts you have trouble understanding:

Ignatius of Antioch
Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2-7:1 [A.D. 110]).

Justin Martyr
We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these, but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus(First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).

Irenaeus
He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported) how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life — flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord and is in fact a member of him? (Against Heresies 5:2 [A.D. 189]).

Hippolytus
"And she [Wisdom] has furnished her table" [Proverbs 9:1] . . . refers to his [Christ's] honored and undefiled body and blood, which day by day are administered and offered sacrificially at the spiritual divine table, as a memorial of that first and ever-memorable table of the spiritual divine supper [i.e., the Last Supper] (Fragment from Commentary on Proverbs[A.D. 217]).

Aphraahat
After having spoken thus [at the Last Supper], the Lord rose up from the place where he had made the Passover and had given his body as food and his blood as drink, and he went with his disciples to the place where he was to be arrested. But he ate of his own body and drank of his own blood, while he was pondering on the dead. With His own hands the Lord presented his own body to be eaten, and before he was crucified he gave his blood as drink (Treatises 12:6 [A.D. 340]).

Cyril of Jerusalem
The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ(Catechetical Lectures 19:7 [A.D. 350]).

Augustine
What you see is the bread and the chalice, that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith, yet faith does not desire instruction (ibid. 272).


Your denial doesn't make these statements "untrue" . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Console of Trent session 22 says:
"CONCERNING THE THINGS TO BE OBSERVED, AND TO BE AVOIDED, IN THE CELEBRATION OF MASS

FIRST DECREE
What great care is to be taken, that the sacred and holy sacrifice of the mass "

its in the OP "holy Sacrifice of the Mass" is found in Console of Trent session 22 ch 1 and also 2 I o believe also the "Eucharist is called a "Eucharist species" google it. and the CCC refers to this same document in CCC 1373.

correction: that would be CCC 1373 to SC. 7 (SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM ) to Council of Trent, Session XXII, Doctrine on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, c. 2.

the language addresses the "communion" the word used by the Apostles for the sharing and partaking of the bread and wine is representative to those that are partakers in the life and the body of Christ "blood being the life of the body hence Life of Christ" the body yet to be received at resurrection. hence one would be a liar if they participated in an unworthy status, such as not being born of the Holy Spirit, hence under false pretenses. (people don't get ill if they do that today, unless it be spiritually) which in Peter and Paul's day the Lord was enforcing such things.

(1) but there's absolutely no scripture to support any such thing, as the Presence of God (Holy Spirit) is in the bread and wine. no Apostle states such a thing or even implies it, at all.

(2) also there is no scripture teaching, commanding, or instructing, Christians to sacrifice anything other then themselves as an offering up to God. no description of offering bread and wine up to God as a sacrifice. (I've been to a Mass in the recent past and they still do this offering bread and wine up to God as a sacrifice.)

(3) as far as in the order of Melchisedech, he brought the bread and wine to the man of faith hence the faithful but offered up nothing recorded in scripture unto God. no sacrificing activity there. Moses' father in law did when he brought Moses' family to him, and it was recorded, but Melchisedech? no. Jesus brought the bread and the wine His Life and Hid body sustenance essential for the faithful to receive, to live forever in the Presence of God according to the will of God as a Child of God.

Your post is so full of holes, it's difficult to know where to begin, so I have numbered the comments in RED.

First of all - you make the false claim that Scripture doesn't mention that the God is present in Eucharist.
Matt. 26:26, Mark 14:22, Luke 22:19 quote Jesus as saying about the bread, This IS my body.
Matt. 26:28, Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20 quote Jesus as saying about the wine, This IS my blood.

NOWHERE in ALL of the NT does it even imply that the Eucharist is anything BUT His body and blood.

Secondly - your claim that WE sacrifice anything at the mass is completely ignorant and false.
The sacrifice is that of CHRIST, which is re-presented at each mass.

Finally - as to the order of Melcheizedek and the fact that he offered bread and wine - this is an Old Testament TYPE.
The Eucharist is the New Testament FULFILLMENT of that type.

NT Fulfillments are ALWAYS more perfect and glorious than their OT Types.

 

[FHII]

I count 8 misspelled words in your one posting here, some are repeats, in one posting. so what was it you were accusing me of there FHII, and the reason why?

And those were honest misspellings. We are not writing for refereed journals here. I understand that. I never harp on misspelled words unless its important.

I speak plainly and my accusation is clear: I believe it wasn't a typo. I believe you misread the scripture and made wrong conclusions based on your miseading. And I believe you are backtracking and trying to cover it up.

Simply saying, "yea... I messed up!" fixes that. "I was wrong! " fixes that. One of the Catholics on this board even said, "I was being mean". That works also!

I make lots of typos... I apologize. But I don't make typos in context. I may be wrong with my context. But there is a difference.

I geve you an out. I gave you an opportunity to clarify your typos. Hey... Typos aren't a big deal! But what was your response?

yep, that be a big 10-4. if you have a complaint, see section 1-800-who cares about your problem with that.

Yea... Nice.

 

[DPMartin]

"yep, that be a big 10-4. if you have a complaint, see section 1-800-who cares about your problem with that."

Yea... Nice.

thank ya, thank ya very much.

 

[DPMartin]

Your post is so full of holes, it's difficult to know where to begin, so I have numbered the comments in RED.

First of all - you make the false claim that Scripture doesn't mention that the God is present in Eucharist.
Matt. 26:26, Mark 14:22, Luke 22:19 quote Jesus as saying about the bread, This IS my body.
Matt. 26:28, Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20 quote Jesus as saying about the wine, This IS my blood.

if your interpretation is so, when He gave the Apostles when He said this, was He present in His flesh or was He present in the bread and wine when He handed it to the Apostles? are you saying He was in both places? it has to be what you are saying you know.

NOWHERE in ALL of the NT does it even imply that the Eucharist is anything BUT His body and blood.

Secondly - your claim that WE sacrifice anything at the mass is completely ignorant and false.
The sacrifice is that of CHRIST, which is re-presented at each mass.

ok now, is it a representation as you say "re-presented " or the actual presence of God? which is it?

Finally - as to the order of Melcheizedek and the fact that he offered bread and wine - this is an Old Testament TYPE.
The Eucharist is the New Testament FULFILLMENT of that type.

so where does it say Melcheizedek offered? in Genesis it says "brought forth bread and wine" no offerings there by Melcheizedek. so its not true that Melcheizedek offered.

what is throwing you is the church claims the "holy sacrifice of the Mass" and that the Presence of the Lord is in that sacrifice. hence either they are re-sacrificing Christ on the altar , or the Presence of the Lord Jesus isn't in the physical bread and wine as the church claims it to be. because they would be sore in error if they be re-sacrificing the Lord unto the Lord. there is only one sacrifice according to Paul and the rest of the NT. so just what is being sacrificed on the altar in catholic churches?