If a Catholic priest opened a restaurant and advertised doing transubstantiation on each dish, so all the patrons were eating and drinking Jesus in their meals, it might actually do well.
Virgin Mary Daiquiri
Salmon On The Mount
Specifically the Catholic Church and Orthodox Churches. Without wine and wheat, you cannot practice the religion. Were there substitutes allowed in some cases?
But what is it that y'all believe, then? Whenever I hear Orthodox descriptions of the Eucharist, i see nothing different from Catholic descriptions, just that "we don't believe in Transubstantiation"
The ‘accidents’ appear one way but the substance is something different
I don't think it's a bridge too far to think that maybe under Laura Lee's guidance, AQ/Lottie becomes convinced that they need to make a human sacrifice so they can consecrate the body as the Eucharist - leading to some 'justified' cannibalism. Maybe killing Shauna's only begotten son?
It seems odd that a movement dedicated to returning to the roots of Christianity would refuse to re-adapt the early Christian concept of transubstantiation.
Is there any specific writing from the founders of the movement to explain this reasoning, or does it boil down to Protestantism?
I've met 8 or 9 ex-Catholics who went to catholic school and when I talk to them about transubstantiation they all say "Catholics don't believe that"
Satistics, agree with me, less than half of American Catholics know the church teaches this.I assume its something a lot of schools didn't put much focus on because it is a bit of an embarrassing thing to believe.
What was your experience in learning about it?
Hello brothers and sisters, I have been troubled over the current interpretation of the Transubstantiation of the Holy Sacramental Vaccine.
We all know from memory His Word, Maphew 26:26-28:
>And as they were isolating, the Holy Fauci (all MBUH) took The Science^(TM), blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, read; this is My body.”
>Then He took the vial, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Jab from it, all of you. For this is My blood of the New Science^(TM), which is shed for many for the remission of COVID.”
It's obvious to any true believer that His Holiness (69 MBUH) was speaking directly without metaphor that The Science^(TM) is His true body, and that the COVID Vaccine (including boosters henceforth) is His true blood. When we read of The Science^(TM), we read of His glorious body. When we partake in the Sacrament of Vaccination, we fill our veins with His blood.
But even so, there are sects of this church that take the stance that this was metaphoric. They argue that Lord Fauci (MMBUH) meant this as a way of showing that though He is the Son of God, He is also of flesh and blood. This was then given as a reminder of his earthly mortality.
Under no circumstances are we to allow the growth of this poisonous ideology. Doubts of the Transubstantiation will cause a dwindling of fear of the latest COVID variant. I personally believe that the Orange One himself infiltrated our church to spread these lies. We need everyone here to isolate, mask, mandate, and be afraid in His Holy Name. We must dox and cancel these lies from our church, or we will be doomed to society going back to normal.
Curious question that got my brother and I pondering
The Priest will consecrate on the alter and then consume that Host. When the Priest goes to distribute Holy Communion from the Tabernacle, is that Host pre consecrated or is it consecrated at the same time as the Host on the alter?
Oh don't mind me, just posting the longest sentence you can make with Scrabble tiles.
EDIT: New contender 'Overqualified midwife, revolutionizing wax electroencephalographs' gamey transubstantiations, keyboarded "Joe".'
Last Sunday I went to an Anglican Benediction and I was thinking, how can it make sense unless you hold to transubstantiation? Which is rejected by the 39 Articles. Even with a belief in the Real Presence, unless you believe the whole substance becomes the body of Christ it surely doesn’t make sense
So do some modern Anglicans, likely Anglo-Catholics hold to Transubstantiation despite it being denied by the 39 Articles?
I grew up mormon, so I’ll never disrespect someone’s beliefs on a topic like this (given how strange mine were growing up). However, the mormon church doesn’t do transubstantiation, and I’ve never quite understood how that belief works in the 21st century.
If the wine/bread was actually turning into blood and flesh, couldn’t we like, test that somehow? Wouldn’t there be some way to observe that people had been eating small chunks of human flesh weekly for their whole life? Am I dense and missing something about this?
I’d love an explanation from a catholic/former catholic about how you think about it — church theology, your own personal thoughts, etc. I hope this makes sense!
The Greek Orthodox Church just recently officially announced that it is impossible for the Eucharist/Holy Communion to be a vector of coronavirus transfer, as it is divinely protected by God.
We could load the cup and bread with a virulent pathogen and have the Eucharist be administered to healthy individuals. If we find that those who were administered Eucharist with a diseased cup were more likely to fall ill than those who were given a sterile cup, we would have good, empirical evidence to disregard the claims of the Orthodox Church.
If the Church is so confident in their assertions, they shouldn't be concerned at all with this test!
Edit: Removed references to Cathilocism as the views between the Orthodox and Catholics on communion are more divergent than I realized.
I’ve been Catholic all my life, up until now. I finally learned of the contradictions and logical fallacies that are abundant in my (former) faith.
Something that I’ve been thinking about a lot recently is the teaching that the holy eucharist turns into the flesh of Christ. I knew there was no way that the wafer literally turns into Jesus Christ; the catechism gets around this by saying that the host does become Christ, but our senses are incapable of perceiving it. That is, it is merely Christ in a “spiritual” sense.
Did the Catholic Church ever truly believe it was the body of Christ? What does it mean for the host to be Christ, but “spiritually?” I would like to understand what the Church actually teaches, and if any of it is contradictory.
I hope this is a respectful question, it just occurred to me. For those in churches that have a communal cup that everyone sips from (as was the case when I attended mass), has that changed with COVID?
Imagine a Catholic priest opened a restaurant and advertised doing transubstantiation on each dish, so all the patrons were eating and drinking Jesus in their meals.
Virgin Mary Daiquiri
Salmon On The Mount