• 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!

On Communion

Agnus_Dei

New Member
I know the Eastern Orthodox Church doesn’t use the term “Transubstantiation”, so it must be a RC term coined in a response to the Reformers.

I’m happy with the Eastern Orthodox stand on the Eucharist as nothing more than a Mystery. I’m sure some of the Fathers wrote about such, but generally we don’t try and pin point at exactly when the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ during the Liturgy or how…we just take the Lord at His word and believe by the power of the Holy Spirit…it happens.

On a side note: My family and I will be Chrismated into the Orthodox Church this Saturday the 14th! So on Pentecost Sunday, we’ll get to experience this Mystery.

ICXC NIKA
-
 

Thinkingstuff

Active Member
Matt Black said:
No, I think the term is a theological straw man; I don't believe Luther taught it. What I think both he and Cranmer taught is akin to sacramental union, and this Wiki article explains it better than I can. The difference between this and transubstantiation is that in the latter the emblems or physical elements (bread and wine) are annihilated (per Aquinas) so that only the Body and Blood are left), whereas in the former they remain together with the Body and Blood of Christ.


Ok. I can accept mystery and the article. thanks. But the point is the ealiest recorded church fathers outside of the NT believed this. This leads me to wonder about oral tradition.
 

Thinkingstuff

Active Member
Agnus_Dei said:
I know the Eastern Orthodox Church doesn’t use the term “Transubstantiation”, so it must be a RC term coined in a response to the Reformers.

I’m happy with the Eastern Orthodox stand on the Eucharist as nothing more than a Mystery. I’m sure some of the Fathers wrote about such, but generally we don’t try and pin point at exactly when the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ during the Liturgy or how…we just take the Lord at His word and believe by the power of the Holy Spirit…it happens.

On a side note: My family and I will be Chrismated into the Orthodox Church this Saturday the 14th! So on Pentecost Sunday, we’ll get to experience this Mystery.

ICXC NIKA
-
Why Orthodox over Catholic?
 

mrtumnus

New Member
Agnus_Dei said:
I know the Eastern Orthodox Church doesn’t use the term “Transubstantiation”, so it must be a RC term coined in a response to the Reformers.

I’m happy with the Eastern Orthodox stand on the Eucharist as nothing more than a Mystery. I’m sure some of the Fathers wrote about such, but generally we don’t try and pin point at exactly when the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ during the Liturgy or how…we just take the Lord at His word and believe by the power of the Holy Spirit…it happens.

On a side note: My family and I will be Chrismated into the Orthodox Church this Saturday the 14th! So on Pentecost Sunday, we’ll get to experience this Mystery.

ICXC NIKA
-
Congratulations on your entry into the church Agnus! I know how much time and effort there is on preparation. I have a wonderful friend who is EO, and I just met another wonderful person (online) who is OO. It is truly an ancient and beautiful faith.

I have been noting with interest how much of Catholic theology is being cross-referenced with Orthodox beliefs in a positive light over recent years. And my heart is warmed when I hear both John Paul II and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew express the need for the church to breathe with 'two lungs'. I know that is not popular with many of the Orthodox faithful! And I believe many Catholics put an interpretation on that which is to their own liking.;) Best to let the Holy Spirit work anything out but my prayer will always be that His work will prevail.

I know your heart will be overflowing this weekend.:)
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Thinkingstuff said:
Ok. I can accept mystery and the article. thanks. But the point is the ealiest recorded church fathers outside of the NT believed this. This leads me to wonder about oral tradition.
That point is instructive: in any attempt to have a discussion on this matter using Scripture alone, it usually descends into a battle of the proof texts as per your OP. There has to be some method therefore of adjudicating between these competing interpretations of Scripture. At the very least, the ECFs such as Ignatius of Antioch and Justin Martyr can provide that interpretation, together with many other ECFs writing on the same subject*; indeed, it is the case that nearly all the patristic writings of the first few centuries of the Church affirm the Real Presence (I can only think of two in the 4th and 5th centuries who are on record as espousing a mere memorialist or symbolic view of the Eucharist, and their names elude me - actually I think one was Evagrius of Pontus - but they're not normally counted as ECFs). Not even proto-Reformers like Wycliffe or Hus denied the Real Presence (in fact one of the Hussite objections to the Mass was not the Real Presence but that fact that the laity were denied the cup and thus denied, as the Utraquist wing of the Hussites believed, reception of the Blood of Christ). Only with Zwingli do you first get memorialism rearing its head significantly.

*See next post.
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
For example, in addition to the ECFs you quoted:
Ignatius (again)


"I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible" (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).

Irenaeus



"If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?" (Against Heresies 4:33–32 [A.D. 189]).

"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 receives the Word of God and becomes 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?" (ibid., 5:2).


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]).


Tertullian



"[T]here is not a soul that can at all procure salvation, except it believe whilst it is in the flesh, so true is it that the flesh is the very condition on which salvation hinges. And since the soul is, in consequence of its salvation, chosen to the service of God, it is the flesh which actually renders it capable of such service. The flesh, indeed, is washed [in baptism], in order that the soul may be cleansed . . . the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands [in confirmation], that the soul also may be illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds [in the Eucharist] on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God" (The Resurrection of the Dead 8 [A.D. 210]).


Hippolytus



"‘And she [Wisdom] has furnished her table’ [Prov. 9:2] . . . 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]).


Origen



"Formerly there was baptism in an obscure way . . . now, however, in full view, there is regeneration in water and in the Holy Spirit. Formerly, in an obscure way, there was manna for food; now, however, in full view, there is the true food, the flesh of the Word of God, as he himself says: ‘My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink’ [John 6:55]" (Homilies on Numbers 7:2 [A.D. 248]).


Cyprian of Carthage



"He [Paul] threatens, moreover, the stubborn and forward, and denounces them, saying, ‘Whosoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord’ [1 Cor. 11:27]. All these warnings being scorned and contemned—[lapsed Christians will often take Communion] before their sin is expiated, before confession has been made of their crime, before their conscience has been purged by sacrifice and by the hand of the priest, before the offense of an angry and threatening Lord has been appeased, [and so] violence is done to his body and blood; and they sin now against their Lord more with their hand and mouth than when they denied their Lord" (The Lapsed 15–16 [A.D. 251]).


Council of Nicaea I



"It has come to the knowledge of the holy and great synod that, in some districts and cities, the deacons administer the Eucharist to the presbyters [i.e., priests], whereas neither canon nor custom permits that they who have no right to offer [the Eucharistic sacrifice] should give the Body of Christ to them that do offer [it]" (Canon 18 [A.D. 325]).


Aphraahat the Persian Sage



"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]).

"Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that; for they are, according to the Master’s declaration, the body and blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm. Do not judge in this matter by taste, but be fully assured by the faith, not doubting that you have been deemed worthy of the body and blood of Christ. . . . [Since you are] fully convinced that the apparent bread is not bread, even though it is sensible to the taste, but the body of Christ, and that the apparent wine is not wine, even though the taste would have it so, . . . partake of that bread as something spiritual, and put a cheerful face on your soul" (ibid., 22:6, 9).


Ambrose of Milan



"Perhaps you may be saying, ‘I see something else; how can you assure me that I am receiving the body of Christ?’ It but remains for us to prove it. And how many are the examples we might use! . . . Christ is in that sacrament, because it is the body of Christ" (The Mysteries 9:50, 58 [A.D. 390]).


Theodore of Mopsuestia



"When [Christ] gave the bread he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my body,’ but, ‘This is my body.’ In the same way, when he gave the cup of his blood he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my blood,’ but, ‘This is my blood’; for he wanted us to look upon the [Eucharistic elements] after their reception of grace and the coming of the Holy Spirit not according to their nature, but receive them as they are, the body and blood of our Lord. We ought . . . not regard [the elements] merely as bread and cup, but as the body and blood of the Lord, into which they were transformed by the descent of the Holy Spirit" (Catechetical Homilies 5:1 [A.D. 405]).


Augustine



"Christ was carried in his own hands when, referring to his own body, he said, ‘This is my body’ [Matt. 26:26]. For he carried that body in his hands" (Explanations of the Psalms 33:1:10 [A.D. 405]).

"I promised you [new Christians], who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the sacrament of the Lord’s Table. . . . That bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ" (Sermons 227 [A.D. 411]).

...

"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).


Council of Ephesus



"We will necessarily add this also. Proclaiming the death, according to the flesh, of the only-begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, confessing his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into heaven, we offer the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and so go on to the mystical thanksgivings, and are sanctified, having received his holy flesh and the precious blood of Christ the Savior of us all. And not as common flesh do we receive it; God forbid: nor as of a man sanctified and associated with the Word according to the unity of worth, or as having a divine indwelling, but as truly the life-giving and very flesh of the Word himself. For he is the life according to his nature as God, and when he became united to his flesh, he made it also to be life-giving" (Session 1, Letter of Cyril to Nestorius [A.D. 431]).



 

Agnus_Dei

New Member
Thinkingstuff said:
Why Orthodox over Catholic?
Hi Thinkingstuff

Good question, but there’s no way one or two posts could do justice to my answer. Only that over the past 4 years, I’ve been reading not only Scripture, but history of the Early Church, the Apostolic, Early and Desert Fathers of the Church. I’ve taken both the Catholic RCIA classes and Orthodox Catechesis Classes.

In the end after being a Baptist my whole life, a Methodist a few years and having attended both Roman Catholic and Orthodox Liturgies, it just seemed that after I took all that I’ve learned and have experienced, the Orthodox Church is the one true Church of the Apostles.

As the U2 song “I Still haven’t Found What I’m Looking For” goes, I thought for a long time that the plot of the song was true, but…I’m a living testimony with patience and prayer, by asking and seeking, God will lead you...IF, you let Him.

ICXC NIKA
-
 

Agnus_Dei

New Member
mrtumnus said:
Congratulations on your entry into the church Agnus!
Thank you mrtumnus…it’s been a long time coming and I’m truly blessed and thankful that my whole family will be entering the Church at the same time and our two youngest kids will be baptized (that should be interesting, since the EO immerse).

In XC
-
 
Top