Historical Views On the Eucharist
-
-
First Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/10/2002
Location: USA
Here is an article to get us started out in discussing the various views on the Lord's Supper - The Eucharist. It is from an outside source, so we will have to see how accurate it is to our positions. Wikipedia - 'Eucharist'quote:
Eucharist
The Eucharist is either the Christian sacrament of consecrated bread and wine or the ritual surrounding it. The term "Eucharist" is used mainly in Catholic, Anglican, Eastern Orthodox and Lutheran traditions, and is based upon the Greek word #949;#965;#967;#945;#961;#953;#963;#964;#969;, eucharisto, meaning to give thanks or to rejoice. The form of the ritual within the liturgy and its attendant theology vary from tradition to tradition. Many Protestant traditions refer to "Communion", a term used abundantly in Catholic and Orthodox circles as well. See also The Lord's Supper.
Historical roots of the Eucharist
Institution. The three synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) as well as Saint Paul's first Letter to the Corinthians contain versions of the so-called "Words of Institution" spoken by Jesus at the Last Supper: "Take, eat, this is my body.... Take, drink, this is my blood.... Do this in remembrance of me." All subsequent celebration of the Eucharist is based on this injunction.
See also: Historical roots of Catholic Eucharistic theology
Eucharistic theologies
The Eucharist has always been at the center of Christian worship. Every Christian tradition has its own theology to explain the meaning of this central sacrament, agreeing in places with other traditions, disagreeing in other places, and sometimes describing seemingly identical concepts with very different language. In general, the following is true for Catholic, Anglican, and Orthodox traditions: The Eucharist is seen as the fulfillment of the Divine Economy (God's plan for the salvation of humanity from sin), a commemoration of Jesus's Crucifixion on Calvary and his Resurrection, the means for Christians to unite with God and with each other, and the giving of thanks for all of these things. Differences in Eucharistic theology tend to be related to differences in understanding of these areas as well.
Catholic Eucharistic theology
The Eucharist is one of the seven Catholic sacraments which assist the believer in the progression toward union with God, and is deemed the "source and summit of Christian life". [1] (http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm) Belief that the Eucharist literally is the body and blood of Jesus, through a substantial change that occurs by the power of God, is rooted in the earliest church writings. This "mystery of faith" [2] (http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_03091965_mysterium_en.html) is a critical element of the religion.
Eucharistic union with God is a primary component in the Catholic conception of prayer life, in which one progresses first along the purgative way, e.g., confessing sins before receiving communion, a tradition dating from the earliest period of the church. Later one passes along to the illuminative and unitive ways (see prayer). Nourished by the Eucharist, according to Catholic belief, the faithful seek to live by Christ as Christ lives by the Father.
Because the bread and wine are believed to be truly changed into the Body and Blood of Christ, any pieces that are not distributed at the Mass must be either consumed by the priest or stored in a special container called a tabernacle. (The blood of Christ must always be consumed.) Catholics worship the Eucharistic species stored in the tabernacle. Especially notable is the practice of genuflection when entering into its presence. A special blessing, called Eucharistic Benediction may be given using the consecrated forms.
Orthodox Euchari
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 09/22/2004
Location: Canada
Thanks Al:
Great post - lots to reflect upon-
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/08/2003
Location: USA
Hi all...
I was waylaid... had to wash windows for my neighbor  There are some advantages to being unemployed 
I could not locate the email from my pastor, however I do have the book he referred me to. It is The Church of Rome at the Bar of History by William Webster. Here's are some quotes:quote:
The Roman Catholic doctrine of the eucharist was first given dogmatic expression at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, when the Church formally adopted the doctrine of transubstantiation as its official teaching. This was confirmed by the Council of Trent, which also asserted that the Lord's Supper was a propitiatory sacrifice of sin. These are the two primary and supremely important elements of the Church's teaching on the eucharist -- transubstantiation and sacrifice.
[...]
From the beginning of the Church the Fathers generally expressed their belief in the Real Presence in the eucharist, in that they identified the elements with the body and blood of Christ, and also referred to the eucharist as a sacrifice, but there was considerable difference of opinion among the Fathers on the precise nature of these things, reflected in the fact that the ancient Church produced no official dogma of the Lord's Supper.
[...]
What I believe an objective analysis will reveal is that the views of the Fathers are very consistent with the differing views represented by the Roman Catholic Church and those of the Protestant Reformers. Some of the Fathers taught that the elements are symbols of the body and blood of Christ and that his presence is spiritual, while others maintained that the elements are changed into Christ's body and blood and that his presence is physical.
Edited by Diana Holberg on 10/27/2004 13:18:21
-
-
- Adminreputation
- 10254 Posts
Member since 07/25/2001
Location: USA
Disagreement is not a problem because the foundation of Truth is not men, it's the Church. Once She tells us what is the correct interpretation, we must obey.
"Look on the bright side, if this is the best they've got around here, in six months we'll be running this planet." (Planet of the Apes)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/10/2002
Location: USA
quote:
What I believe an objective analysis will reveal is that the views of the Fathers are very consistent with the differing views represented by the Roman Catholic Church and those of the Protestant Reformers. Some of the Fathers taught that the elements are symbols of the body and blood of Christ and that his presence is spiritual, while others maintained that the elements are changed into Christ's body and blood and that his presence is physical.
I am astounded that such a noted anti-Catholic polemist would make such a concession - that is telling.
One of the areas that is confusing to modern Protestants is the use of the word 'symbol' - it is an excellent word, and we Catholics still use it today - but it historically did not mean 'empty' symbol. or 'mere' symbol - something can literally be a sacramental or 'full' symbol. Just as at every Catholic Mass we hear the Lord's words: 'Do this in remembrance of Me' - this does not negate the Real Presence, but affirms it.
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 09/04/2003
Location: USA
quote:
7. Does the mere partaking, either of Baptism or the Lord's Supper confer spiritual blessings?
No; they are worthless, if not injurious, to those who do not exercise faith.
8. But how is it when they are partaken of by those who do exercise faith?
The Spirit of God makes them, to such persons, precious means of grace.
Okay, it took me awhile to locate where I had originally posted this.
But, does this seem like a contradiction or is it just me? On one hand it states that these do not confer spiritual blessing, but it also states that if you have faith they are means of Grace 
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/08/2003
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by Lubellmac
But, does this seem like a contradiction or is it just me? On one hand it states that these do not confer spiritual blessing, but it also states that if you have faith they are means of Grace
Lu, my understanding of grace as a Baptist has been different than my understanding of grace for Catholics.
Baptists believe that grace is just another word for "unmerited favor"... a standing before God that we did not earn.
Baptists teach that obedience to the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord's Supper are essential to continued grace -- not in that participating in them earns that grace but rather that we participate in them because we have a relationship with Christ through God's grace.
Even so, your point is well taken. I have never before heard the phrase "as a means of grace" used in Baptist circles with regard to the Lord's Supper.
Edited by Diana Holberg on 10/27/2004 15:05:43
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/08/2003
Location: USA
I found a better explanation than mine on this site, though it is not Baptist (ignore the "new Covenant" stuff):
Fresh Fire Ministries- Statement of Faithquote:
3. THE ORDINANCES OF THE CHURCH
We believe that water baptism and the Lord’s Supper are ordinances to be observed by the church. They are, however, not to be regarded as a means of Salvation. We regard:
(i) Water baptism by immersion, as a visible representation of our death, burial and resurrection with Christ.
(ii) The Lord’s Supper, as a means of fellowship of the Spiritual body of Christ, and as a partaking of the Spiritual benefits bequeathed to new Covenant believers through the perpetual reverent observance of the ordinance.
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 09/04/2003
Location: USA
Thanks Diana 
I am still trying to research when the Baptist began this view of communion.
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 09/22/2004
Location: Canada
Lubellmac:
quote:
8. But how is it when they are partaken of by those who do exercise faith?
The Spirit of God makes them, to such persons, precious means of grace.
That is beautiful.
isthat from the Baptist catechism.
It sure resonates with something inside of me -
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 09/22/2004
Location: Canada
Made as1 quote:
[quote]Baptists believe that grace is just another word for "unmerited favor"... a standing before God that we did not earn.
Baptists teach that obedience to the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord's Supper are essential to continued grace -- not in that participating in them earns that grace but rather that we participate in them because we have a relationship with Christ through God's grace.
Even so, your point is well taken. I have never before heard the phrase "as a means of grace" used in Baptist circles with regard to the Lord's Supper.
So, what is the Catholic understanding of "Grace"
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 09/04/2003
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by annasong
Lubellmac:
quote:
8. But how is it when they are partaken of by those who do exercise faith?
The Spirit of God makes them, to such persons, precious means of grace.
That is beautiful.
isthat from the Baptist catechism.
It sure resonates with something inside of me -
Yes, that is from one of them.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/08/2003
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by annasong
So, what is the Catholic understanding of "Grace"
You'd best ask a Catholic
What first jumped out at me from Catholics was a reference to "graces" (plural). As Baptists, we would never make grace plural.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/08/2003
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by Lubellmac
Thanks Diana
I am still trying to research when the Baptist began this view of communion.
Great... I'm really interested in knowing that too. I hope you'll post it when you find it.
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 04/08/2004
Location: USA
The definition depends on the type of grace. From the Pocket Catholic Dictionary by Fr. John A. Hardon S.J.
GRACE. In biblical language the condescension or benevolence (Greek charis) shown by God toward the human race; it is also the unmerited gift proceeding from this benevolent disposition. Grace, therefore, is a totally gratuitous gift on which man has absolutely no claim. Where on occasion the Scriptures speak of grace as pleasing charm or thanks for favors received, this is a derived and not primary use of the term.
As the Church has come to explain the meaning of grace, it refers to something more than the gifts of nature, such as creation or the blessings of bodily health. Grace is the supernatural gift that God, of his free benevolence, bestows on rational creatures for their eternal salvation. The gifts of grace are essentially supernatural. They surpass the being, powers, and claims of created nature, namely sanctifying grace, the infused virtues, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and actual grace. They are the indispensable means necessary to reach the beatific vision. In a secondary sense, grace also includes such blessings as the miraculous gifts of prophecy or healing, or the preternatural gifts of freedom from concupiscence.
The essence of grace, properly so called, is its gratuity, since no creature has a right to the beatific vision, and its finality or purpose is to lead one to eternal life. (Etym. Latin gratia, favor; a gift freely given.) See also ACTUAL GRACE, EFFICACIOUS GRACE, HABITUAL GRACE, JUSTIFYING GRACE, SACRAMENTAL GRACE, SANCTIFYING GRACE, SUFFICIENT GRACE.
ACTUAL GRACE. Temporary supernatural intervention by God to enlighten the mind or strengthen the will to perform supernatural actions that lead to heaven. Actual grace is therefore a transient divine assistance to enable man to obtain, retain, or grow in supernatural grace and the life of God.
EFFICACIOUS GRACE. The actual grace to which free consent is given by the will so that the grace produces its divinely intended effect. In the controversy between the Dominicans [led by Báñez (1528-1604)] and the Jesuits [led by Molina (1525-1600)] there was no agreement on what precisely causes an actual grace to become efficacious. In the Báñezian theory, the efficacy of such grace depends on the character of the grace itself; in the Molinist theory, it depends on the fact that it is given under circumstances that God foresees to be congruous with the dispositions of the person receiving the grace. In every Catholic theory, however, it is agreed that efficacious grace does not necessitate the will or destroy human freedom. (Etym. Latin efficax, powerful, effective, efficient, gratia, favor freely given.)
HABITUAL GRACE. Constant supernatural quality of the soul which sanctifies a person inherently and makes him or her just and pleasing to God. Also called sanctifying grace or justifying grace
JUSTIFYING GRACE. The grace by which a person is restored to God’s friendship, either for the first time, as in baptism, or after baptism, as in the sacrament of penance.
SACRAMENTAL GRACE. The grace conferred by the valid and fruitful reception of the sacraments. It may be one or more of several kinds: 1. sanctifying grace is communicated in baptism, penance and in anointing of the sick when needed; 2. sanctifying grace is always increased when a sacrament is received in the state of grace; 3. actual grace is given by all the sacraments, either actually at the time of reception or also by title as a person needs divine help; 4. the sacramental character is indelibly imprinted on the soul in baptism, confirmation, and the priesthood; and 5. a distinctive sacramental grace is imparted by each of the seven sacraments, corresponding to their respective purpose in the supernatural life of the soul.
SANCTIFYING GRACE. The supernatural state of being infused by God, which permanently inheres in
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/10/2002
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by Lubellmac
quote:
7. Does the mere partaking, either of Baptism or the Lord's Supper confer spiritual blessings?
No; they are worthless, if not injurious, to those who do not exercise faith.
8. But how is it when they are partaken of by those who do exercise faith?
The Spirit of God makes them, to such persons, precious means of grace.
Okay, it took me awhile to locate where I had originally posted this.
But, does this seem like a contradiction or is it just me? On one hand it states that these do not confer spiritual blessing, but it also states that if you have faith they are means of Grace
No, I think it is consistent. It is something very similar to what we believe about a Catholic who is in a state of mortal sin and partakes of Communion vs. one who is properly disposed and in a state of grace.
They just use different words.
I would say that that particular confession does seem to be pretty strong for a Baptist confession...possibly reformed Baptist?
|
|
Subscribe by Email
RSS