Tell me which Catholic teachings decades ago said that the sacraments and our understanding of the Eucharist originated with Roman paganism.
Never seen this in the Catholic Catechism.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Church as a Rock Concert
- Thread starter rockytopva
- Start date
- Status
Tell me which Catholic teachings decades ago said that the sacraments and our understanding of the Eucharist originated with Roman paganism.
Never seen this in the Catholic Catechism.
It wasn't in a Catechism, to my knowledge. It was, however, a fairly standard answer Catholic theologians provided to account for the Catholic Eucharist (the sacrament was identical to Roman pagan sacraments and foreign to the earliest church practices).
If it isn’t in The Catechism of The Catholic Church, it isn’t Catholic “teaching”.
So we can correct your assertion, can’t we. It’s not Catholic teaching at all. We can call it, Myth Busted.
The meanderings of theologians do not equal the official teachings as stated by The Catholic Church in her Catechism.
In fact what I demonstrated from the Scripture, The Didache, and the Church Fathers shows a far more faithful sacrificial origin of the Eucharist.
Justin Martyr gives the outline of how the Eucharist was celebrated in his day. The Catholic Mass followed this same outline for 1850 years.
“But we, after we have thus washed him who has been convinced and has assented to our teaching, bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptized [illuminated] person, and for all others in every place, that we may be counted worthy, now that we have learned the truth, by our works also to be found good citizens and keepers of the commandments, so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation.
Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss. There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands.
And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the Hebrew language to ge’noito [so be it].
And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion.” Justin Martyr. 155 Ad.
Catholics instantly recognise this as the Eucharistic celebration, simply because we have always followed the same formula.
Not only this we have the same understanding of the Eucharist after so much time has passed. The Eucharist is the flesh and blood of Jesus.
“And this food is called among us Eucharistia [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined.
For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” Justin Martyr .
The Didache and Justin martyr hold that the Eucharist is sacrificial and the fulfilment of the prophecy of Malachi.
Where in all this is the Roman paganism?
It is what Catholic theologians taught to explain why the sacraments were initially absent but when they appeared they were identical to the Roman pagan rituals of the "host".
What Catechism teaches that same sex marriages can be blessed by the Roman Catholic Church?
They weren’t absent.
Sacramental means something than conveys healing and transforming grace, and we can see this with Eucharist as the Church Fathers understood it.
Ordinances don’t convey grace, but are merely done for conformity. Doesn’t do anything, but you do it because you are told to, and only because you are told to.
The Anabaptists were the main culprits, denying transmission of Grace here. It’s part of the desupernaturalisation of Christianity that Protestantism began.
So what does Justin Martyr think of the Eucharist, did he think it does anything.
Yes.
“For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.“ Justin Martyr.
Same with Justin Martyrs understanding of Baptism
“And this food is called among us Eucharistia [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined.“
So regenerative Grace conveyed by baptism, it does something.
This is why heresy is so bad, it denies future generations the ancient Christian Faith and understanding.
If that is true then you have your answer. Those Catholic theologians....who were priests....were explaining how some of those sacraments started in order to strengthen Catholics who were aware of history. God purified the pagan "host" ritual and made it holy, changing the earlier "comunion" to a sacrament.
No, it merely gave a Latin name to what they knew was happening already, Grace was being conveyed by these rituals, these were not mere ordinances to them.
Grace being involved, these rituals were already Holy.
It wasn't a name, though. The pagan "host" came to take place of the communion described in Acts.
That said, the Catholic argument was that God then used those rituals to convey grace.
It was, BTW, an excellent explanation. Rather than denying history those Catholic theologians readily acknowledged that tge Roman Church adopted pagan rituals which took the place of earlier practices. But they saw this as God purifying the pagan rituals in order to communicate His grace.
The reason it was a very good explanation is that it was acceptable to those knowledgeable of history while the laity simply held the ultimate dogma (that these rituals communicate God's grace) within their mythology without even realizing it was myth.
Both the educated and the laity ended up holding the same view of those sacraments.
Now, I reject the doctrine because on one hand find fault with the idea of God purifying paganism and reinventing church worship in a paganistic style.....on the other hand I do not believe the end (a particular belief) justifies teaching a myth as fact.
Besides it’s scriptural, mysterion is the Greek word for sacrament, which is mentioned 27 times in the New Testament.
It’s meaning is “ Awe “ at something deep, profound, or holy.
So it’s a scriptural word that translates into Latin as sacramentum , to convey that something is holy.
Holy Communion for instance.
It’s meaning is “ Awe “ at something deep, profound, or holy.
So it’s a scriptural word that translates into Latin as sacramentum , to convey that something is holy.
Holy Communion for instance.
You keep saying pagan rituals, yet you have quoted nothing, nor quoted these supposed theologians.
I have given you everything from Scripture and the Church Fathers.
It’s like you didn’t even know that Sacrament is a scriptural term.
If you are talking about Christian rituals supplanting pagan rituals, then we have no issue.
Many pagan rituals were supplanted by Christian rituals without Christianity adopting or being corrupted by paganry.
Theologians have talked a great deal about pagan religions being supplanted, this might be the source of your confusion.
So Christian ritual being adopted instead of... not in fusion with pagan rituals.
What we are actually witnessing in the Eucharistic celebration of Justin Martyr, is the sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper.
“blood of the covenant which will be shed for many.”
Our Lord makes this clear with His sacrificial language.
Also Justin Martyr says that the bread and wine is changed by the prayer of His word.
“so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word (Jesus ), and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.”
The words being “ This is my Body “ and “ This is the Cup of my Blood “.
And Justin held that it was the flesh and blood of Jesus.
All this at a time when Roman pagans were killing Christians and accusing Christians of what many Protestants accuse Catholics today, namely of cannibalism.
Justin went on to be martyred by the pagan Romans.
Holding to the exact same Eucharistic belief as Justin Martyr, Ignatius Bishop of Antioch and disciple of John was also martyred by the pagan romans.
They died by fire and lions for this Sacrificial Eucharistic belief, and the reality of Jesus flesh and blood in the Eucharist.
It is disgusting to accuse the Eucharist of being from Roman paganism, when it is clearly witnessed to by Apostolic men who were killed by pagan Romans.
Many have died professing the reality of Jesus flesh and blood in The Eucharist, it has always been the core of the true Christian Faith.
“blood of the covenant which will be shed for many.”
Our Lord makes this clear with His sacrificial language.
Also Justin Martyr says that the bread and wine is changed by the prayer of His word.
“so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word (Jesus ), and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.”
The words being “ This is my Body “ and “ This is the Cup of my Blood “.
And Justin held that it was the flesh and blood of Jesus.
All this at a time when Roman pagans were killing Christians and accusing Christians of what many Protestants accuse Catholics today, namely of cannibalism.
Justin went on to be martyred by the pagan Romans.
Holding to the exact same Eucharistic belief as Justin Martyr, Ignatius Bishop of Antioch and disciple of John was also martyred by the pagan romans.
They died by fire and lions for this Sacrificial Eucharistic belief, and the reality of Jesus flesh and blood in the Eucharist.
It is disgusting to accuse the Eucharist of being from Roman paganism, when it is clearly witnessed to by Apostolic men who were killed by pagan Romans.
Many have died professing the reality of Jesus flesh and blood in The Eucharist, it has always been the core of the true Christian Faith.
37818
Well-Known Member
Transubstantiation is not Biblical.
Yes it is. You have Christ’s own words standing witness for all time and eternity.
“ This is my Body “, “ This is the Cup of my blood “
“ Unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink His blood, you have no life in you “
“ He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood, abides in me and I in him “
“ He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood, has eternal life and I will raise him up on the last day. “
“ So He who eats me, will live because of me “
You have The Apostolic successors witnessing to it with their own blood in the arenas.
“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. They who deny this gift of God are perishing” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Smyrnaeans, 7,1 (c. A.D. 110).
“For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (c. A.D. 110-165).
“But what consistency is there in those who hold that the bread over which thanks have been given is the Body of their Lord, and the cup His Blood, if they do not acknowledge that He is the Son of the Creator of the world…” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, IV:18, 2 (c. A.D. 200).
“For the blood of the grape–that is, the Word–desired to be mixed with water, as His blood is mingled with salvation. And the blood of the Lord is twofold. For there is the blood of His flesh, by which we are redeemed from corruption; and the spiritual, that by which we are anointed. And to drink the blood of Jesus, is to become partaker of the Lord’s immortality; the Spirit being the energetic principle of the Word, as blood is of flesh. Accordingly, as wine is blended with water, so is the Spirit with man. And the one, the mixture of wine and water, nourishes to faith; while the other, the Spirit, conducts to immortality. And the mixture of both–of the water and of the Word–is called Eucharist, renowned and glorious grace; and they who by faith partake of it are sanctified both in body and soul.” Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, 2 (ante A.D. 202).
When we eat Jesus flesh and drink His blood, we become partakers of His immortality.
Only Jesus is Life.
37818
Well-Known Member
Metaphor. Of the remembrance of His finished work, completed on the cross.
Jesus Himself being the true manna from heaven. John 6:47-48, Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. I am that bread of life.
John 6:35, And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
@Cathode, you are conflating two different teachings.
Last edited:
No, not metaphor. It is a hard teaching requiring supernatural faith granted by the Father to believe it.
They don’t believe in Jesus, they don’t believe Jesus flesh is real food and blood is real drink.
And in their denial they don’t come to Him and eat His flesh and drink His blood, they remain in hunger and thirst.
Those that believe Jesus words will come to Him and eat His flesh and drink His blood as He said, and receive Life.
“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. “
“ My flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. “
Once people believe Jesus words, then they will come to His table and eat His flesh and drink His blood and have life.
Those that do not believe Jesus words here, are like those who were sent an invitation to the feast, and making their theological excuses they refused to come to the feast, and were unworthy of a place at the feast, and their places given to another.
37818
Well-Known Member
Denial of metaphor.
Again you are not understanding what that teaching means.
John 6:35, And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
John 6:47-48, Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. I am that bread of life.
John 3:18, He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Denial of reality, Jesus words are reality.
Jesus flesh is real food and blood real drink. People not believing this, denying this, they do not come to Jesus and eat His Flesh and drink His blood.
They don’t believe, and disobey his words.
“Therefore, everyone who hears these words of mine and acts on them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock.“
Believing is not just mental assent, it is in doing what Jesus says. That’s how it saves.
“ Unless you eat the flesh of the son of man, and drink His blood, you have no life in you. “
“Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him.”
Judas didn’t believe Jesus flesh was real food and blood was real drink.
He betrayed Jesus after eating Jesus flesh without believing, at the last supper.
“As soon as Judas ate the bread, Satan entered into him. So Jesus told him, “What you are about to do, do quickly.”
The Eucharist brings Life to those who believe, but those who don’t believe eat and drink their damnation.
Unless people have the garment of faith in Jesus words, they can not partake this feast.
Why don’t people come to receive Jesus in the Eucharist, because they do not believe Jesus flesh is real food and blood is real drink.
Peter had to make a supernatural act of faith in Jesus words.
“ You have the words of everlasting Life. “
This is entering by the narrow way, through the singularity of faith in Jesus words.
Catholics believe Jesus words, we believe Jesus flesh is real food and blood is real drink.
We believe that the Eucharist is Jesus Body and Blood, we believe it because Jesus said it.
37818
Well-Known Member
Not believing metaphor to be metaphor is not believing the words.
There is zero salvation in the false teachings of transubstantiation.
It is a conflation of the metaphor of the remembrance with promise of Jesus being the bread of life.
John 6:47-48, Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. I am that bread of life.
It wasn’t a metaphor.
Jesus said that his flesh was real food and real drink, not symbolic food and symbolic drink.
When Jesus was speaking metaphorically and the disciples misunderstood him to be speaking literally, He always corrected them.
11 “After he had said this, he went on to tell them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep;but I am going there to wake him up.”
12 His disciples replied, “Lord, if he sleeps, he will get better.” 13 Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep.
14 So then he told them plainly, “Lazarus is dead, 15 and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him.”
The woman at the well took Jesus literally about having ordinary water welling up, but then He made her understand that He was talking of spiritual water.
In John 6 Jesus does the opposite. Instead of explaining it as metaphorical, He keeps telling them it is literal eating of His flesh, until there is no doubt that Jesus is talking literally.
“ How can this man give us his flesh to eat? “
It created such a crisis that many left Jesus, and He even had to turn to his trusted twelve and ask if they wanted to leave as well.
It was a hard literal teaching of Jesus.
Peter made a supernatural act of Faith in Jesus words, he did not understand with his mind, he believed it because Jesus said it.
This is the test of Faith all men must pass, to enter the feast. Try use human reasoning and you will fail.
“ He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. “
“ The bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world “
“ My flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. “
“ Take this all of you and eat it, this is my Body. “
“Take this all of you and drink from it, this is the Cup of my blood “
Believe Jesus words, and eat His flesh and drink His blood.
- Status