Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Why do catholic call Mary mother of God. | Amos 1:1 | Reformer Joe | 69951 | ||
"I think from now on I would like to stick to more mundane bible questions." Oh, come on, Emmaus. You have to admit that discussions like these have a lot more significance than the "Cain's wife" question or the percent alcohol by volume of Bible wine! :) 'Look carefully at Catholic doctrinal statements on the Real Presence, including transubstantiation and you will notice that the word "physical" is scrupulosly avoided and absent. The terms used for the Presence are always "substanially" and "sacramentally," but never physically.' Well, if the Catholic definition of "substantially" is substantially different than the common definition of "physically," then precisely what is the disagreement between the Calvinist view and the Catholic view? Here is the WCF, Chapter 29, on the sacrament: "VII. Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements, in this sacrament, do then also, inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally but spiritually, receive and feed upon, Christ crucified, and all benefits of His death: the body and blood of Christ being then, not corporally or carnally, in, with, or under the bread and wine; yet, as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses." I also am confused by Merton's statements on the body of Christ not being locally present in the Eucharist. "Locally" comes from the Latin word "locus," meaning place. For something to be local means for it to be in the same place ("location") as the thing it is local to. Now after the words of institution are spoken, what does the Catholic priest hold in his hands? Is it bread or the body of Christ? How can one say that what is being given to the communicants and what they are ingesting is the very substance of Christ's body, and at the same time insist that the body of Christ is not "locally" in the sacrament? Merton seems to be contradicting himself in the very same paragraph. Christ converts the substance of the bread into His body, but doesn't produce it? In the Catholic view, does Christ produces the substance of his body from the bread, or he replaces it with the already-existing substance of His body? If the latter, we fall back into the Chalcedonian problem: Christ's human nature is not infinite. The two natures of Christ exist "without confusion, without change, without division, without separation." To attribute infinity and omnipresence to Christ's body (his human nature) would be confusing and/or changing the natures. You wrote: "Are you teaching techniques for Spanish as challanging as your forum style?" Boy, I hope so! :) "They must hate you now, but the survivors prbably love you later if they gain proficiency." And, unlike on the Forum, I don't have too many students telling me I have got my Spanish wrong! :) May God bless you during this Advent season! --Joe! |
||||||
2 | Why do catholic call Mary mother of God. | Amos 1:1 | Emmaus | 69957 | ||
Joe, You are right about the relative significance of the subject. We are also past the level of "get out of religion and into a relationship with Christ." At least I hope so. I don't think I can answer better than Merton. You really should get the book, which is about a lot more than just Transubstantiation. Basically the substance is the answer to the essential question, What is this? and the answer is, the Body of Christ. The accidents are the outward appearence and sensory perceptions but not the essential quality of the reality. But I may not be exactly precise. It has a long time since I studied the exact meaning of these philosophical terms dealing with reality and existence. I must admit my conversations with non Catholics rarely get to this level. See my "get out of religion" comment. What I like about this forum is that the people I most often interact with are not that way. And conversations with people who always agree with you are not very stimulating, assuming you can even get a conversation going in such a circumstance. Your question about what is the difference between the Calvinist position and the Catholic is the right question. I am sorry to say I don't have a ready answer for you. So it seems we are in the same spot in that regard. But I knew that the information would surprise you. I also think the answer to your question about "production" is that Merton was saying that the Body of Christ was not "produced" or "adduced" by the priest but the change is effected by Christ through the Holy Spirit as the prayer called the epiclesis just before the consecration asks. Another book I highly recommend: The Lambs Supper: The Mass as Heaven on Earth, by Scott Hahn, is a treatment of the Mass in the context of covenant and a participation in the liturgy of heaven as seen in Revelation. I gave it to another Presbyterian friend after we got into a dicussion of covenant theology. Her note in the book when she returned it said she found it "very interesting and thought provoking." The section of the Catechism on the Eucharist, I think you would also find interesting if you have not already read it. Sometimes I prefer these kinds of discussion where we are left with something to think about. Emmaus |
||||||