Transubstantiation

[ICTHUS]

Alright, time for a little scholarship and putting of the money where the mouth resideth, so to speak.

According to Roman Catholicism, in the Eucharist, what is the Sign, and what is the thing signified thereby? I think I know what you're going to say, but I want to hear it from you guys before I ask my follow up question.

[Mrs. Bro. Adam]

Something can truly be what it also signifies, if that is what you are going after.


([color=green]Bro. Adam [/color]again - one more time, I'm a sucker for ICTHUS's baiting)

Edited August 22, 2004 by Mrs. Bro. Adam

[ICTHUS]

So, am I correct in assuming that the bread and the wine are the sign, and the Body and Blood of Christ are the thing signified thereby?

[Brother Adam]

Agh, in my own login now. . .


Not so sure bout this "sign" thing, but the substance of the bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, accidents remaining.

In Protestant Theology, bread and grape juice are used as a symbolic representation of the body and blood of Jesus shed at calvary - a misunderstanding of the final passover meal.

[ICTHUS]

[quote]Agh, in my own login now. . .


Not so sure bout this "sign" thing, but the substance of the bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, accidents remaining. [/quote] That wasn't what I asked. In the Sacrament of the Altar, what is the sign, and what is the thing signified.

[quote]In Protestant Theology, bread and grape juice are used as a symbolic representation of the body and blood of Jesus shed at calvary - a misunderstanding of the final passover meal.[/quote] This is not Protestant sacramentology per se, it is Zwinglian sacramentology. The only Protestants who affirm it are Baptists, and their ecclesiastical ilk. The rest of us who affirm traditional Protestantism (i.e. Presbyterians, Lutherans, Anglicans, etc) affirm some form of real presence. Please argue with this in mind - I do not affirm Zwinglianism, which is a theological abberation.

Edited August 22, 2004 by ICTHUS

[Brother Adam]

Perhaps you are refering to "the sacrifice of the alter"? Maybe you should just "come out with it" so we can get on with the discussion.


True, I took you for someone in the reformed group. Then you are what? Lutheran? Anglican?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote] That wasn't what I asked. In the Sacrament of the Altar, what is the sign, and what is the thing signified.[/quote]

The sign is the Body and Blood of Christ, under the accidents of Bread and Wine and they signify what they truly are, the Body and Blood of Christ.

[Theoketos]

Consubstantiation is not the same thing as transubstantiation. The Higher Protestant Churches affirm the former, where as it is only Catholics who suscribe the latter.

With in the idea of consubstantion, the matter of the bread and wine, still exsist, at the same time Christ is present, according the the Lutherine interpritation.

With the Idea of Transubstantiation, the bread and wine no longer exsist, leaving only Christ (and the accidental qualities). This does several things, among many, it keeps us from worshiping bread, and it keeps the matter and form of the Sacrament as Jesus inteaded it to be. He said this is my Body, not this is my body amongest the bread.

Thus the symbol is Christ.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Theoketos' date='Aug 22 2004, 03:54 PM'] Consubstantiation is not the same thing as transubstantiation. The Higher Protestant Churches affirm the former, where as it is only Catholics who suscribe the latter.

With in the idea of consubstantion, the matter of the bread and wine, still exsist, at the same time Christ is present, according the the Lutherine interpritation.

With the Idea of Transubstantiation, the bread and wine no longer exsist, leaving only Christ (and the accidental qualities). This does several things, among many, it keeps us from worshiping bread, and it keeps the matter and form of the Sacrament as Jesus inteaded it to be. He said this is my Body, not this is my body amongest the bread.

Thus the symbol is Christ. [/quote]
Yes. The symbol is Christ and the thing signified is Christ.

What else can you expect from God but for Him to be completely honest and humble? See, He comes to us for our sake and signifies Himself not with a banner of heraldry, but simply with Himself as symbol and symbolized. He is that straighforward to us, like the humble man who opens himself entirely and hides nothing, Christ not only lets us see Him for who He truly is, but He represents Himself fully in Himself and by Himself with no additional symbol. He is plain and humble, honest and straighforward. In short, He is who is.

[ICTHUS]

So Christ is a symbol of Himself? What the heck...Im confused..

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Aug 22 2004, 04:02 PM'] So Christ is a symbol of Himself? What the heck...Im confused.. [/quote]
"I believe because it is absurd." -Tertullian

[Theoketos]

I am Who am! -God

[-I---Love]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Aug 22 2004, 04:03 PM'] "I believe because it is absurd." -Tertullian [/quote]
Yes!!!

[ICTHUS]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Aug 22 2004, 03:03 PM'] "I believe because it is absurd." -Tertullian [/quote]
Can I see the context of that quote, please?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Aug 22 2004, 04:20 PM'] Can I see the context of that quote, please? [/quote]
I'll see what I can do, but it was just a little motto. I don't think the context has to do with the discussion at hand...the quote is just a quip that came to mind when you said you were confused.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Aug 22 2004, 04:30 PM'] I'll see what I can do, but it was just a little motto. I don't think the context has to do with the discussion at hand...the quote is just a quip that came to mind when you said you were confused. [/quote]
[quote]"And the Son of God died; it is by all means to be believed, because it is absurd. And he was buried and rose again; the fact is certain because it is impossible."
Tertullian (150-225), De Carne Christi[/quote]

I believe my quote was an adaptation of this line.

[ICTHUS]

So is this 'Christ is a sign of himself' thing official Roman Catholic doctrine, or just something conceived of to fend off another Protestant attack?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Aug 22 2004, 04:47 PM'] So is this 'Christ is a sign of himself' thing official Roman Catholic doctrine, or just something conceived of to fend off another Protestant attack? [/quote]
It's official. Give me a minute and I'll find the relevant info in the Catechism.

[Theoketos]

I think that Catholics can affrim that the Eucharist is a sign...Of Christ Love, humility, forgivenss...It is also Christ.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote]At the heart of the Eucharistic celebration are the bread and wine [color=red][Raphael: Understand that this is referring to before Consecration][/color] that, by the words of Christ and the invocation of the Holy Spirit [color=red][Raphael:  This is the moment of Consecration][/color], become Christ's Body and Blood...The signs of bread and wine [color=red][Raphael:  Another reference to before the Consecration, at which time they do symbolize, and only symbolize Christ's Body and Blood][/color] become, in a way surpassing understanding, the Body and Blood of Christ; they continue also to signify the goodness in creation.  -CCC 1333[/quote]

Therefore, at the time of Consecration and afterward, which is when we rightfully refer to the former bread and wine as the Body and Blood of Christ, the Most Holy Sacrament, the Eucharist, Communion, et. al., the Eucharist truly is the Body and Blood of Christ and therefore actually is what it symbolizes. It may be helpful to understand the original meaning of the word "symbol." It comes from the Greek "symbolon" and is half of a broken object. A "symbolon" would be placed with it's other half to identify it. Thus, the word "symbol," in its original context, which the Catholic Church uses, refers to an object which represents what it is. A broken dish half, for instance, is of the material of the dish. It is rightfully said to be of the same essence as a dish. It would be matched with the other half, the dish. So, in context of the ancient meaning, a symbol is a thing which represents itself. The symbol of a thing, in the purest sense, is in truth the thing itself.