|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: In the bread or in the eating?
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
At communion, Christ is present not so much in the bread and the wine as in the eating and the drinking.
Do you agree? And if so, and if not, what are the implications for presidency, the method of serving, seating, who may join in, the atmosphere of the service, and anything else that seems relevant.
[ 15. June 2003, 20:17: Message edited by: Alan Cresswell ]
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
I think that it has to be 'in' the bread and wine, rather than 'in' the eating and drinking. When Christ instituted the Lord's Supper he said: 'Take, eat, this is my body' not 'Take, eat, and as you do I will be with you'. Also, the more I read the passages on the institution of the Eucharist the more I believe that in John 6 (I am the bread of life &c.) Jesus is talking in a Eucharistic context - which again leads to an 'in' the bread interpretation. I can't really write about the Eucharist without quoting a Charles Wesley hymn so...
quote:
He bids us eat and drink
imperishable food;
He gives his flesh to be our meat,
and bids us drink his blood.
I think that the implications on theology of the priesthood taken from theology of the Eucharist are very interesting. I am yet to come across someone who considers a truly priestly role of the celebrant at the Eucharist in the context of the 'every believer is a priest' version of the priesthood of all believers. It seems a shame that this interpretation seems to lead very quickly to not having any priests, rather than having lots and lots because everyone is a priest. There seems (to me) to be much more of a sense of our collective priesthood in churches which focus that in an ordained priesthood/presbyterate than in those which hold rigidly to every believer is a priest therefore there can be no other form or manifestation of priesthood.
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
I think the presence of Christ is represented in every aspect, both the elements and the eating. The sacrament represents the way that we receive Him in our lives by doing as He teaches (the wine, or blood) and receiving His love in our hearts (the bread, or body).
However, the real presence of God depends on the actual hearts and minds of the communicants. If they do not believe in and love Him, He is no more present in the sacrament than He would be if they were home watching TV. God, of course, is always present. But when He is not received, that presence is called "absence."
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tom Day
Ship's revolutionary
# 3630
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
At communion, Christ is present not so much in the bread and the wine as in the eating and the drinking.
I'll agree with you there Hatless.
When i was preparing for confirmation, my Youth leader said to me to remember that Communion is always a celebration, a party, when you are with like minded people celebrating the fact that God sent his one and only son to die for me.
I try to always make a point of this, and look at the officiators and smile and be happy when i am taking it. I have always thought it would be fun if we did it at a long table, sat down and drunk more than sip and ate more than a small wafer / piece of bread.
tom
--------------------
My allotment blog
Posts: 6473 | From: My Sofa | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by day_thomas:
I have always thought it would be fun if we did it at a long table, sat down and drunk more than sip and ate more than a small wafer / piece of bread.
Me too. I have often thought this. ![[Love]](graemlins/lovedrops.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wm Duncan
Buoy tender
# 3021
|
Posted
More the "eating" than the "bread."
I'm moved by the way Paul talks about it; "One who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself." (1 Cor 11:29). I used to think this was about the "bread." But the verse is set in the midst of an extensive passage talking about the Church, the gathered people, as the body of Christ (1 Cor. 11:17-14:40). Receiving Christ's real presence in the eucharist may also be about the "bread", but it's largely about discerning, in the gathered Church, the Body of Christ.
Wm Duncan
--------------------
I have overcome a fiercely anti-Catholic upbringing in order to attend Mass simply and solely to escape Protestant guitars. Why am I here? Who gave these nice Catholics guitars?
-- Annie Dillard
Posts: 1193 | From: about 30 km above the Juan de Fuca plate | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
I agree with Freddy (as in so much!) Samuel Taylor Coleridge said:-
"people are generally correct in what they affirm and generally err in what they deny"
Why does so much have to be EITHER / OR? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
Hmmmm...or is Christ present in the person, and thus the actions are manifestations of our attempt to be Christ-like?
And...if people bake their own bread and make their own wine/grape juice, would that not be an symbol of God's creation?
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear OgtheDim
In the Orthodox Church the people do just that .... the wine is sometimes a bit more difficult but it is still brought to Church with the baked bread or prosphora. The preparation of the prosphora is a little service in itself. More for the "AND" rather than the "OR" I see! ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
I agree with Fr. Gregory. I think it's in the Bread and in the eating. In the Bread, because Christ's eternal sacrifice, once given is in the Bread. In the eating because it's the communicants who are following His command "Take, eat; this is my body which is given for you: Do this in remembrance of me."
This isn't an either/or case.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rowen
Shipmate
# 1194
|
Posted
Bread and eating too.
day thomas, one need not feel always obliged to be happy when participating in the sacrament of communion. Some of the most meaningful ones I have celebrated are in times of great grief.... saying farewell before someone dies, after a death, at a funeral, around the bedside of someine who is severely dpresssed.
Of course, we present the great certainity of the joy of life everlasting with Christ- but it is also a way of saying to people that in the midst of their despair, Christ comes to be with them, and hold them tight.
Similarly, in church, where I am not "clergy" but a "normal" pewsitter- in the midst of whatever I might be feeling- joy, fear for the future, hope, the yuckiness of the flu, sorrow, confusion- Christ comes to be with me and hold me toght, as I watch another minister officiate, and then I consume....
--------------------
"May I live this day… compassionate of heart" (John O’Donoghue)...
Posts: 4897 | From: Somewhere cold in Victoria, Australia | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hooker's Trick
Admin Emeritus and Guardian of the Gin
# 89
|
Posted
Our friend the Blessed Richard Hooker certainly indicates that the miracle of the Eucharist in the reception. Blessed Dr Cranmer seems to believe this as well, which is why the Service of Holy Communion in the Book of Common Prayer is so ordered.
Posts: 6735 | From: Gin Lane | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022
|
Posted
It must be both : there's no point in one without the other in my view.
--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced
Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
I agree with MerseyMike - should it not also be said to be in the context of the gathered community of the faithful? (I'm trying to find a wording that includes those such as the elderly/sick who may receive it at home, in hospital etc.).
Ian
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
"Christ is present by faith in the heart of the believer, through His Spirit." That is the way we were taught.
So it is in the reception of Christ Himself that we are united with Him. The bread and wine remain a symbol, reminder, metaphor, which enable us to remember and experience Christ's presence. The actual breaking apart of the loaf is also important.
I have participated in communion as you describe it, day_thomas and Freddy, the whole church gathered at a table celebrating and eating and drinking the bread (whole loaves) and wine (glasses full). Also, when eating out with friends from our church, when the waiter brings the basket of bread and the wine before the meal, we have celebrated communion. Wonderful.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bonzo
Shipmate
# 2481
|
Posted
Christ is not present in the bread or the wine, well, not anymore than he is present in any bread and wine aywhere, or chips and coke for that matter.
Something special only happens when people gather together to remember him. The bread and wine are symbols of Christ but they do not become Christ.
I realise that other people may not view the bread and wine like this, I suspect that some people might want to say it's both in the bread and wine and in the people, possibly to minimise offence (I think the art of the compromise fudge is a halmark of Christian debate).
But me, I prefer to say what I think. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
Love wastefully
Posts: 1150 | From: Stockport | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear Bonzo
quote:
I realise that other people may not view the bread and wine like this, I suspect that some people might want to say it's both in the bread and wine and in the people, possibly to minimise offence (I think the art of the compromise fudge is a halmark of Christian debate).
But me, I prefer to say what I think.
So do I say what I think. I am afraid that your comment is very patronising to those of us who actually BELIEVE that is both ... for very good reasons. It's only a fudge to those who consider the two understandings to be alternatives rather than complementary parts of one truth.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
As in the current thread on baptism, we're one again up against that huge fault line which exists in Christianity between sacramentalists and non sacramentalists. The baptising of unaware infants or the giving of the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist to infants(in Orthodoxy) of to the senile, mentally challenged or otherwise oblivious only makes sense to someone whe believes the elements to be sanctified by the Holy Spirit and so contain the true essence of Christ. In that case it's in the Bread and Wine and the water.
If you don't believe that then you have believer's baptism and treat the bread and wine, or grape juice merely as something done in memory of Christ's sacrifice. There may be some exceptions, I've known Methodists who are sacramentalists, but on these boards, for the most pat the Orthodox, Catholic and Anglocatholic contributors are sacramentalists and anything to the left of that isn't. I think its a fundamental divide, because it affects every aspect of one's attitude towards participation in the Eucharist, and one's involvement in the Mass.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH:
The baptising of unaware infants or the giving of the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist to infants(in Orthodoxy) of to the senile, mentally challenged or otherwise oblivious only makes sense to someone whe believes the elements to be sanctified by the Holy Spirit and so contain the true essence of Christ.
That's not strictly true, because the "true essence of Christ" is in the action of the congregation in obedience to Christ (whether to celebrate communion or baptise). Whether or not the elements themselves also contain Christ, the actions of the people of God coming together to worship and serve (through the sacraments or otherwise) is sacramental. So it can make sense to offer these sacraments to those who don't intellectually understand them (after all, who actually does fully understand?) even if they themselves don't carry the essence of Christ.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
Alan
I don't disagree that the action of the congregation in obedience to Christ is an important part of making Him pesent in a baptism or Eucharist, but there is more to sacramentalism than that. Take the following prayer of consecration:
"Vouchsafe O God, we beseech thee, to make this oblation bles+sed, appro+ved and ac+cepted, a perfect and worthy offering: that it may become for us the Bo+dy and Blo+od of thy dearly beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ."(From the Canon of the Mass-English Missal) That and all other consecration prayers containing an epiclesis such as conscration prayers A and B in CW and all Catholic and Orthodozx rites imply that the priestly consecration from within the Apostolic Succession, invokes the real presence of Christ in the elements.
So I agree with you in part, but think you're leaving out some essentials of sacramentalism.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Paul, I was speaking from a "non-sacramentalist" position. Just pointing out that you don't have to be a "sacramentalist" to believe in the efficacy of baptism or communion received by those without sufficient understanding of the rite (eg: infants). And that such a position is not non-sensical.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
the "true essence of Christ" is in the action of the congregation in obedience to Christ (whether to celebrate communion or baptise). Whether or not the elements themselves also contain Christ, the actions of the people of God coming together to worship and serve (through the sacraments or otherwise) is sacramental.
I agree with Alan. I think this is where the discussion gets interesting.
For me, the actions of breaking and serving, the telling of the story, the remembering and wondering, the sense of the table stretching across continents and centuries: the whole thing in all its variety is powerful and effective. It does make the grace and truth of Jesus Christ very present for me.
Now is that a sacramental view or not? I tend to use the word. I'm quite happy to say that Christ is present at the table, but there are things I wouldn't say.
I think the bread is special only in the sense that it acquires meaning by association. It has sentimental value like my dead father's wristwatch has for me. It's a good idea, therefore, to dispose of the bread with some sensitivity to those who might find the sight of it dropping onto the used tea bags in the kitchen bin somewhat jarring. But I can't see how there can be anything different or special about the bread apart from our associations, and if pushed I would be inclined to deny any claim that the bread was different and even to say that such a view was foolish.
Is the difference, then, about where we see Christ? Some focus on the bread, some focus on the actions and eating. Or is there a sharper difference here? Are some sacramentalists in a different way? Are people like me non-sacramentalist?
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Hatless I will reply more fully to the opening question but at least historically there is clear evidence for your stance being taken as Sacramental.
The evidence for this is the act of the Churches of Christ in the UK. In eyes of the Churches of Christ the difference between the United Reformed Church in England & Wales and the Baptist Union was that the United Reformed Church had a sacramentalist understanding of Baptism and Eucharist. This enabled them to join with the United Reformed Church in England & Wales to form the United Reformed Church in United Kingdom despite the practicals of baptismal policy being closer to the Baptists (they were adult baptising only). Your understanding of Eucharist would be quite happily mainstream United Reformed Church today.
Sorry for using all the formal titles but when it comes to church mergers I have to do it.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
starrina
The rose warrior
# 3549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bonzo:
Something special only happens when people gather together to remember him. The bread and wine are symbols of Christ but they do not become Christ.
I realise that other people may not view the bread and wine like this, I suspect that some people might want to say it's both in the bread and wine and in the people, possibly to minimise offence (I think the art of the compromise fudge is a halmark of Christian debate).
But me, I prefer to say what I think.
Bonzo,
that I believe Christ is present in the bread and wine in the people has nothing to do with wanting to not offend people, but that I believe this is the case. (strange, I know).
I believe Christ is present in the bread and wine due to the mystery of the sacramental nature of the eucharist. (this is important because in eating the bread and wine which is the body and blood of Christ it is an expression of how close the relationship between God and the believer is).
however, Christ is present among the community because He is God and He is everywhere, aswell as residing in us through his spirit.
There, not a compromise at all, see! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
--------------------
"what have you been doing while Bells has been maturing?"
"Drinking better whiskey."
Posts: 275 | From: the kwoon | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Oldie
Shipmate
# 1756
|
Posted
I believe in the Real Presence, yet I always have a slight sense of unease when it comes to the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament - no "ifs or buts", no eating or drinking, just worshipping a piece of bread which has become the Body of Christ. I am at a loss to explain why. Does anyone else with my belief have the same (rather unsettling) experience?
Posts: 91 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
I can see from where you're coming, Golden Oldie. I believe in the Real Presence very firmly, and would happily affirm that the bread becomes Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. I do, however, find Benediction strange when not in the context of the Eucharist - tagged on to the end of Mass I can manage, but I find it odd on the end of Evensong.
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Benediction, according to Vatican 2, should not be detached from its context, the Eucharist. There is no benediction in Orthodoxy but we do bless the people with the chalice (containing also the Lamb {= body of Christ}) after Communion.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Jengie, I belong to a church that's part of the Baptist Union, yet I find myself close to Hatless in his (her?) understanding of the Eucharist/Lord's Supper. I'm not sure if that makes me a Baptist sacramentalist. There are liturgical Baptists about so perhaps there are sacramental ones too ...
Anyway - to all intents and purposes the Baptist Union isn't that strong an affiliation. Or so it seems to me. We hardly hear anything about it. The various house-church or restorationist networks appear far more 'connexional' and denominational to me (who used to be in one).
So I daresay there's room for breadth and diversity. Mind you, I was nearly stoned to death at one house group meeting I attended where I suggested that the Lord's Supper was more than simply a memorial. Mind you, my persecutors on that occasion were both ex-Roman Catholics so they may have had an axe to grind ...
I don't know much about the URC's - I've only attended one meeting (find it on Mystery Worshipper ) - but I certainly detected a slightly 'higher' view of communion in a URC chaplain who used to come into the university where I work than is probably common among Baptists.
On balance, I suppose I incline towards the rather Calvinistic understanding outlined by Daisy May but I do have somewhat schizophrenic pangs in a 'higher' direction from time to time. Mind you, I would feel uncomfortable about venerating the wafer etc.
On Christmas Eve I received communion in the Baptist chapel round the corner from my mother's bungalow in South Wales and at the mildly High parish church just outside the village on Christmas morning. In their different ways I enjoyed (as it were) both.
![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
So what does that tell you?
Gamaliel
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Christ is, of course, in everything, but he's in teh bread and the wine in a way that he's not anywhere else. So much so that St. Paul said some people died when they partook "unworthily" -- ouch! Potent stuff.
Reader Alexis
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Jengie, I belong to a church that's part of the Baptist Union, yet I find myself close to Hatless in his (her?) understanding of the Eucharist/Lord's Supper. I'm not sure if that makes me a Baptist sacramentalist. There are liturgical Baptists about so perhaps there are sacramental ones too ...
Hatless is a him and also part of a Baptist Union church. Like you, I'm confused about whether I count as a sacramentalist or not. I'm not sure what it is that a strongly sacramentalist person believes that I don't.
I affirm the presence of Christ at the eucharist. I believe that this is entailed by the Incarnation, by the Trinity, by the doctrine of God. God is a God who comes to us, and becomes one with us, and the rivet, if you like, that pins human and divine together is the cross, meaning the whole sacrifice of Christ as remembered in the eucharist. So that's pretty real for me.
But I don't see why Christ is in the bread and wine any more than in the plate and cup, or the cloth on the table, or the re-telling of the story, or the outstretching of the server's arm, or the receptive mind of the worshipper, or the determination of those who have received to live more generously. All of these are to some extent sanctified by association with the celebration of communion.
Do those who identify the presence with the bread and wine feel that my sacramentalism is deficient? And why? What more is it that they believe?
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear Hatless
The bread and the wine are organically linked to eating, drinking, faith, Calvary, the Resurrection, Christ Himself in ways that the cloth, the chalice etc., aren't.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
Fr G,
That last post inspired in me a sudden vision of a congregation with robot-strength teeth munching through the silver patens, tearing through he fine linen, patting their tummies and burping.
Others (the elderly?) were dunking the cloths in the grape juice and sucking.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr. Gregory:
Dear Hatless
The bread and the wine are organically linked to eating, drinking, faith, Calvary, the Resurrection, Christ Himself in ways that the cloth, the chalice etc., aren't.
Really? To be facetious, we obviously have fresher bread in Ilkley than you are used to. Ours is organically linked to fields a long way from Calvary.
To attempt to be serious: I don't understand your point. Why is the bread and wine more linked to eating, drinking, faith, Calvary, etc. than are our actions, faith, posture, words, etc?
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
I was contrasting objects with objects Hatless. Throughout this thread I have said that it is not either / or. The actions and the objects both need each other.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr. Gregory:
I was contrasting objects with objects Hatless. Throughout this thread I have said that it is not either / or. The actions and the objects both need each other.
You weren't contrasting objects with objects, you were linking objects (bread and wine) with much more abstract things: eating, drinking, faith, Calvary, and resurrection. So I remain unclear what you mean.
Nor do I know where the either/or idea comes from. My OP used the phrase 'not so much' for the presence in the elements. If we want to discuss degrees of presence I would say that Christ is no more present in the bread and wine than in the telling of the story, say. Bread and wine are hard to do without, whereas I would say that you can celebrate the eucharist without an alter or without a plate for the bread, with people coming forwards or being served in their places. So in that sense bread and wine are more central (I would, though, be content with any local staple food and any cultural equivalent to wine - a feel-good, take-you-out-of-yourself drink.)
Perhaps it would be good to go back to the example of the service where a consecrated wafer is venerated out of the context of the eucharist. I once went to a service of Benediction. The wafer came out of the wall safe, was lifted up to a high place, we sang and prayed a bit, then it was put away again. I can see that if you were at the Mass with all its rich meaning and sense of God's present grace, then an actual wafer might recapture that occasion. Perhaps some photographs or tape recordings might be better these days. The service was an ecumenical event with people from many denominations present and variously bewildered by it all. Do people believe that a wafer used in a Mass retains the presence of Christ in a way that is real, even for someone who wasn't at that Mass, and is unfamiliar with the practice of keeping some of the wafers afterwards?
My question is, when the bread and wine have lost the context that gave them meaning and left the community which understands their significance, is there any real difference to them? Is this what sacramentalism is about? Or is it about responding with faith and and orderly respect to the presence of God in the whole event of the eucharist?
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear Hatless
Let me make it clearer.
Is Christ in you and me? Yes.
Is Christ in the actions at the Eucharist? Yes.
Is Christ in the elements of bread and wine at the Eucharist? Yes.
Christ cannot be MORE present here or there. Indeed he is everywhere.
This has been said before on a sacramentalism thread but I am going to say it once more ... ![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif)
In the Eucharist ... specified ordinary things, actions and persons become a unitary focus whereby through and in them we are lifted into the Kingdom. Wherever the Kingdom is and focussed there is Christ .... in all, without reservation, without qualification and without choosing or setting one element against another.
Beer and chips? No ... Nominalism ... go figure. Christ sets the terms ... not us.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
How odd to link bread and wine to something like eating and drinking. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Reader Alexis
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Also I note that our Lord said "I am the bread that came down from heaven" and "he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him" -- but never "I am the porcelain dinnerware that came down from heaven" or anything to identify himself with the tablecloth.
Reader Alexis
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Ha ha Mousethief - but please don't take the mickey (as we say over here). Hatless and I are both trying to understand. Of course we recognise a connection between bread and wine and eating and drinking - and with the Last Supper, Calvary, the early Church etc. etc.
And I really don't feel you need to give us a Fr Gregory. It might all be very clear to you but it ain't to us. If it were we'd all be RC's, Orthodox or High Anglicans.
Now - here's a question for you. Is Christ any more present in the bread and wine in an Orthodox Eucharist than he is in, say, a Brethren communion service? Is he slightly more present in a Church of Scotland one where they have some form of 'epiclesis'. Are we talking about a sliding scale here depending on the level of sacramentalism involved?
It seems to me that both Hatless and myself are somewhere in the middle of the sacramental scale and not terribly clear about what it is we're supposed to be missing or deficient in.
Can you enlighten us?
Gamaliel
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Now - here's a question for you. Is Christ any more present in the bread and wine in an Orthodox Eucharist than he is in, say, a Brethren communion service?
We Orthodox steadfastly refuse to speculate about the efficacy of other churches' sacraments. We do our best to hold fast to the traditions we were taught, as we are commanded to do by St. Paul (2 Thess 2:15), because we believe God wants us to. What God does or doesn't do somewhere else is not our call. He is not a tame lion.
Reader Alexis
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
What Mousethief said with extra large fries!
I dole out when I say that it's not "either / or" and I'm still saying it with yet more arguments and examples 20 posts down.
I think the REAL problem here is the inherent dislike of Protestantism for holy OBJECTS .... holy actions - yes, holy persons - maybe, holy objects - no. It has to do with hyperpersonalism and a rejection of a theology of "being."
2 little words .... "for me."
Now I am deliberately being a little obscure ... I'm like that sometimes.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
quote:
We Orthodox steadfastly refuse to speculate about the efficacy of other churches' sacraments.
Would that some of the Orthodox showed the same respect for other traditions' beliefs as for their sacraments.
Fr. Gregory, your two paragraphs are not compatible with each other:
quote:
Wherever the Kingdom is and focussed there is Christ .... in all, without reservation, without qualification and without choosing or setting one element against another.
Beer and chips? No ... Nominalism ... go figure. Christ sets the terms ... not us.
You say no reservations or qualifications, then immediately set out a restriction. Which is it? Surely the Orthodox have not adopted that heinous evangelical protestant ™ tactic of denying the validity of anything which is not explicitly supported by scripture?
I agree with all of those who say that the answer to the question is not either/or. Still, I believe that it is Christ’s presence in the hearts and actions of the gathered believers which sanctifies the bread and wine, not the other way around.
Anyone who would claim otherwise must explain why any meal containing bread and wine is not efficacious when eaten in a “secular” setting by unbelievers. Surely not because of the lack of a blessing by an ordained clergyman? To make that claim would be reject the efficacy of other churches sacraments.
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear Scott
"All" doesn't mean "beer and chips" ... it means all that Christ specified.
The consecration of the Sacrament is by the action and the operation of the Holy Spirit .... we do not confect anything ... priest or people. We set up the conditions. He does the rest.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
Very well then. Let us dispense immediately with all religous trappings that Christ did not specify. You go first. What will it be - incense? silver settings? bearded priests? exclusion of some believers?
quote:
We set up the conditions. He does the rest.
Yes, we set up the conditions. Not the bread. Not the wine. We do. Which is essentially what I said before.
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bonzo
Shipmate
# 2481
|
Posted
quote:
We Orthodox steadfastly refuse to speculate about the efficacy of other churches' sacraments.
Othodoxy with it's bottom firmly planted on the fence.
--------------------
Love wastefully
Posts: 1150 | From: Stockport | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear Scot
Presumably you believe that Christ ceased to specify upon his death, (or not?). Unfortunately the New Testament doesn't seem to agree with you, (if you do). The Risen Lord does and says all sorts of things and it doesn't end with his Ascension and the closure of the canon either.
Dear Bonzo
We are not sitting on any fence ... we just don't think we can or should comment on the efficacy of anyone elses' sacraments. When we don't commune elsewhere it is for a different reasons. We keep communing and belonging together. We have had this discussion before on other threads ... it's tangential to the question.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear Scot
quote:
Yes, we set up the conditions. Not the bread. Not the wine. We do. Which is essentially what I said before.
No it isn't. You said that it was the faith of the worshippers that was operational. When I say "set up the conditions" .... I simply mean: "lay the table" ... nothing more. He does the business.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr. Gregory:
Presumably you believe that Christ ceased to specify upon his death, (or not?). Unfortunately the New Testament doesn't seem to agree with you, (if you do). The Risen Lord does and says all sorts of things and it doesn't end with his Ascension and the closure of the canon either.
Apparently I forgot to use the [wild sarcasm] tag. Let me be more direct.
quote:
You wrote:
"All" doesn't mean "beer and chips" ... it means all that Christ specified.
I think that is a strange standard for someone like yourself who objects heartily to the idea that only those things specified in scripture are acceptable.
Personally, I'd be quite happy to celebrate communion with other christians using beer and chips, if it suited the occasion.
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ley Druid
Ship's chemist
# 3246
|
Posted
Dear Scot,
Perhaps owing to the quote:
heinous evangelical protestant ™ tactic of denying the validity of anything which is not explicitly supported by scripture
you cannot understand how the Orthodox might quote:
steadfastly refuse to speculate about the efficacy of other churches' sacraments
Let me offer this illustration: The orthodox have been celebrating eucharist for a very long time. Their way is the ONLY way that the orthodox can do it, the orthodox way. They need not deny the efficacy of any other way, but they faithfully do it their way.
You suggest that quote:
I believe that it is Christ’s presence in the hearts and actions of the gathered believers which sanctifies the bread and wine, not the other way around.
Anyone who would claim otherwise must explain why any meal containing bread and wine is not efficacious when eaten in a “secular” setting by unbelievers
ISTM Fr. Gregory is saying the orthodox believe it is God who sanctifies the bread (irrespective of Christ's presence or absence in the hearts and actions of the gathered believers). Furthermore ISTM Fr. Gregory and Mousethief would disagree with you and not find it necessary to quote:
explain why any meal containing bread and wine is not efficacious when eaten in a “secular" setting by unbelievers
On the contrary, they refuse such speculation of others, but they argue very convincingly what is necessary for orthodox.
Posts: 1188 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
