by leavingwt 64 Replies latest jw friends
Does anyone here accept the doctrine of transubstantiation? If so, please elaborate.
Theology: The changing of the elements of the bread and wine, when they are consecrated in the Eucharist, into the body and blood of Christ (a doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church).
It confuses me b/c I don't see how it actually Christ. If I were chomping on his flesh and bones, then washing it down with his actual blood I would understand it better. Anglicans have a similar formula then shy away from transubstiation. Christ is present in some way in the bread and wine. I don't think I fully understand the doctrine. I don't see why there must be a physical transformation. We aren't eating cadavers-- as far as I know.
It's just the Catholic doctrine. The basis for it is that they take the "is" in "this is my body" to be literal.
Either you believe it or you don't. If you're a Catholic, you probably do, and if you're not, you probably don't.
No. Show me the science. Impossible. UNLESS you have "faith" (imagination) that it is so.
Yes, of course, leavingwt. While the specific theological language of transubstantiation is a later development (the way homoousious was, for example), the belief that the wine and bread are Jesus is the ancient teaching of Christianity. We find it quite explitly stated in the early 2nd century by guys like Sts. Justin Martyr and Ignatius of Antioch, both writing prior to 135 A.D., I believe. For that matter, it is pretty explicit in the Gospel of John. In any case, the Orthodox and Catholics both teach it (or something arbitrarily close to it) and always have.
Probably the best place to get a detailed explanation of the theological basis of the teaching is Aquinas, who leverages the philosophical concepts of essences and accidents to describe what he thinks is going on. It is an interesting treatment, but from my perspective, the more important aspect is simply that it was the original teaching of the Christian community.
I was raised Catholic, and I never really believed transubstantiation was real. I mean, how could anyone actually think this was happening in reality? It just never washed with me - I mean, they really expected people to believe that? Belief doesn't equate with reality. Come on. If they can get people to believe that the church can get them to believe anything.
It is symbolic. Same as Christ being the bread of life. He is not actual bread for the physical body, but bread (manna) for the spirit. Consuming actual blood kind of goes against... do not eat blood... doesn't it?
Sulla, I am curious what part of John you believe states this e x plicitely?
Peace,
Tammy
Plus, wouldn't it taste different than bread and wine if that were the case?
Sometimes we forget other religions are just as nuts as the JW's.
Things About It
Sometimes we forget other religions are just as nuts as the JW's.
That's it in a nutshell isn't it Think About it
They are all bat shit crazy!!!...the religions that is...no offence meant to anyone that follows or belongs to a religion...but seriously...take the shades off......theres a real world out there...
