by leavingwt 64 Replies latest jw friends
Do you believe God (or the Holy Spirit, or Christ, etc) dwells within you Tec? If so (and I think you believe this), does it change your physical characteristics?No.
From what I read of your explanation above, and this comparison that you addressed to me, this is what I got:
The spirit of Christ is within the bread and wine... which is ust a bit deeper than symbolism.
Peace,
Tammy
Thanks NC. I get that part....it's the food chain comment that caught my attention. Of course we are talking about transub Star Trek type replicator stuff like carbohydrate waffers turning into protein from Jesus flesh.
Think About It
Even in marriage:
"For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh"
The accidents are the same, but the substance has changed.
A spiritual change. The physical bodies are the same.
Peace,
tammy
Ah---food chain. I don't suppose google will have our answer. I got this funny image when she used the term low church of a bunch of chimps lined up for communion. I THINK the high church believes it is actually the body and blood of Christ. So I imagine the low church think of it as symbolic. Perhaps that has something to do with the food chain.
NC
NC....that's funny, because I got that same image. The chimp church was pissed because the body & blood of Christ de-evolved into tasteless crackers & red wine by the time they got to take communion.
Think About It
hmmmm. too bad about the chimps. We need to treat them better.
I'm fairly low brow myself---I much prefer wine to blood.
NC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation
In Roman Catholic theology, transubstantiation (in Latin, transsubstantiatio, in Greek μετουσ?ωσις metousiosis) is the doctrine that, in the Eucharist, the substance of wheat bread and grape wine changes into the substance of the Body and the Blood of Jesus, [1] while all that is accessible to the senses (the appearances - species in Latin) remains as before. [2] [3] [4]
The Eastern Orthodox Church and Oriental Orthodox Church have sometimes used the term "transubstantiation" (metousiosis), however terms such as "divine mystery", "trans-elementation" (μεταστοιχε?ωσις metastoicheiosis), "re-ordination" (μεταρρ?θμισις metarrhythmisis), or simply "change" (μεταβολ?) are more common among the Orthodox.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substance_theory
Substance theory , or substance attribute theory , is an ontological theory about objecthood , positing that a substance is distinct from its properties . A thing-in-itself is a property-bearer that must be distinguished from the properties it bears. [1]
That's a lot of theory and explanation over a few words in scripture. I wonder why the bible wasn't a bit more explanatory since it's author would have seen the utter confusion ahead. Ah well---must be a minor point.
NC
I'm fairly low brow myself---I much prefer wine to blood.
The low brow ape church serves beer & pizza.
Edited: After reading the transub theory above....Freddie Franz just became a little less insane to me. Just a little bit.
Think About It
I don't know about England. In America, there are different approaches/cultures in the Anglican Church. Each parish is unique. Anglo-Catholics believe in the Prayer Book that was first translated into English from the Latin Roman Catholic service book. Henry VIII was very Catholic and a true believer. All he did was get rid of Rome. The belief stayed pretty much the same as the Roman Catholic Church. I've attended a few Anglo-Catholic churches. They look more Catholic than a Catholic church. Mary is adored. Candles galore. No kneelers. The sermons are different. They recognize the Pope as the first ideal authority and pray for reunification.
As time passed, more and more of Henry Tudors court were Protestants. When Henry's son became King, Edward Seymour, a Protestant had control over his newphew. King Edward began to introduce more and more Protestant concepts into the Church of England. Many people died over trivial things. There was no stability. Elizabeth announced she would follow the middle way and even more Protestant concepts were introduced. Anglicans can be devotees of a Book of Common Prayer from a certain year. When I first became Anglican, the newest Prayer Book had just been introduced and many traditoinalists hated it. Some churches split off over prayer book differences. Charlles I, a traditionalist, was beheaded by PUritans with Cromwell as leader. During Cromwell's time the Prayer Book was much less Catholic in form.
The Church of England decided to keep everyone within a loose umbrella. High Church looks Roman Catholic from a distance. Women like to wear hats. There is incense. My exposure and preference is High Church. The Roman Catholic Church is highly respected but we are an English church. The cathedral I attended was near Woodstock Jesuit Seminary. The theologians frequently preached the sermon and consecrated the Eucharist. Daniel Berrigan was a frequent priest. He is the "radical priest" in Julio and me by the school yard by Paul Simon. Incense is thick. There was much coordination with European Roman Catholic ministries and shrines. Communion is very important. Older forms of English are used (Rite I).
Broad Church - if I am correct, it is a medium position between High and Low Church. Incense is rare. More modern language is used.
Low Church - is dominant in the South. More emphasis is placed on Morning and Evening Prayer Services. The low-church I attended only had Holy Communion once a month. The priests don't wear such fancy vestments as Anglo-Catholic and High Church. The church buildings tend to be plainer.
I expect that Anglo-Catholics believe in transubstantiation or something very close to it. They want to return to rome without giving up too much independence. High Church-The people I spoke with believed in Transubstation or an actual presence (but the bread is bread and Christ is present in the bread). A lot sounds legalistic. Low Church Anglicans don't place as much emphasis on Holy Eucharist. My guess is that they do not believe in transubtantiation at all. In contrast to High Church Anglicans, low church Anglicans like to view themselves as Protestant.
The Anglican Communion is not Protestant. Protestant defined as a church emerging from the movement of Martin Luther and/or John Calvin. Its formation as a response to Henry's desire to divorce Katherine and marry Ann Boelyn is scandalous. The books I've read said that many Protestants were very active at court when you could be tortured or behead. Ann Boelyn was Protestant. His last wife was Protestant. So the movement was in England. People were interested in reform. Henry would look the other way at knowledge of some Protestants while he executed others. Protestants were translating the Bible into English. There was much intellectual stimulation. I don't believe Henry could have controlled the country if only his divorce were an issue.
Catholics were outlawed for many years. The rich and the gentry built special hiding places for priestsl. The stories of Catholic courage and loyalty to the crown when they were being hunted down are very moving.
Some British people may correct me. B/c of the Witnesses, I've always tried to nail down Anglican doctrine. The priests always quote me flexible language appropriate for a range of beliefs. Somehow out of the intolerance of Henry, Edward, Mary Tudor, and even Elizabeth, a desire grew to have comity.
Some people stand, some people kneel in the same parish. Communion is freely given to anyone. They need not be Christian. I saw priests/ministers of other religions, such as Shinto, receive communion. Commentators remark that the church culture encouraged political activism during the War for Independence. There were so many Episcopalians at the Const'l Convention that other religions were concerned. They found it easier to make political deals. It is one of the reasons for support for the Establishment Clause, which is usually called separation of church and state. (it is not accurate.)
