OrthodoxChristianity.net

Moderated Forums => Convert Issues => Topic started by: Timon on September 23, 2011, 11:00:52 PM

Title: Quick Eucharist question....
Post by: Timon on September 23, 2011, 11:00:52 PM
I understand that the Eucharist is a mystery and cant really be explained, but as of right now I understand that the Orthodox view is that the elements truly become Christ's body while remaining bread and wine.  This is why its such a great mystery.

Is this accurate?

Also are there any dogmas, or things you HAVE to believe about the substance of the elements to become Orthodox??
Title: Re: Quick Eucharist question....
Post by: orthonorm on September 23, 2011, 11:06:00 PM
I understand that the Eucharist is a mystery and cant really be explained, but as of right now I understand that the Orthodox view is that the elements truly become Christ's body while remaining bread and wine.  This is why its such a great mystery.

Is this accurate?

Also are there any dogmas, or things you HAVE to believe about the substance of the elements to become Orthodox??

You do realize Orthodox commune infants?

And no matter what people say here, the de facto answer is no.

I just wrote a zinger about elements . . . darn convert forum.

EDIT: darn lying position and post button. IOW, you are probably just fine if you are even asking such questions. Blood and Body. Bread and Wine. Good Enough.
Title: Re: Quick Eucharist question....
Post by: peteprint on September 23, 2011, 11:54:46 PM
I understand that the Eucharist is a mystery and cant really be explained, but as of right now I understand that the Orthodox view is that the elements truly become Christ's body while remaining bread and wine.  This is why its such a great mystery.

Is this accurate?

Also are there any dogmas, or things you HAVE to believe about the substance of the elements to become Orthodox??

We are required to believe that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of the Lord.  All theories as to how this transformation occurs are simply that, theories, and you are not required to adhere to any of them. (nor are you forbidden to accept one of them).  It is a Mystery, as you stated.
Title: Re: Quick Eucharist question....
Post by: akimori makoto on September 24, 2011, 12:43:55 AM
After the triple-amen at the epiklesis, you are required to refer to the "wine" as the Precious Blood of Christ and the "bread" as the Precious Body of Christ (and mean it).

In what manner the "bread" and "wine" are the Precious Body and Blood of Christ is beyond our comprehension.
Title: Re: Quick Eucharist question....
Post by: Alveus Lacuna on September 24, 2011, 01:34:24 AM
I would say that the best litmus test for whether one is properly "getting it" is during the Presanctified Liturgy during Lent. If you prostrate yourself during the Great Entrance when the Most Precious Body and Blood of our Lord is being carried through, and in some way intuit the immensity of the moment that God Himself is in the room physically, then I would say that you're probably on the right track.

"Just a symbol" or "just" anything won't really cut it, as it's "just" God really and truly making Himself physically present for human consumption.
Title: Re: Quick Eucharist question....
Post by: Asteriktos on September 24, 2011, 06:45:52 AM
After the triple-amen at the epiklesis, you are required to refer to the "wine" as the Precious Blood of Christ and the "bread" as the Precious Body of Christ (and mean it).

Didn't St. Nicholas Cabasilas and others criticize those under Rome for the idea that there was some particular moment (and some particular verbal cue) at which the bread and wine became body and blood?  I know this is not what you are saying exactly, but in practice doesn't it amount to the same type of thinking?
Title: Re: Quick Eucharist question....
Post by: Alveus Lacuna on September 24, 2011, 10:33:30 AM
Didn't St. Nicholas Cabasilas and others criticize those under Rome for the idea that there was some particular moment (and some particular verbal cue) at which the bread and wine became body and blood?  I know this is not what you are saying exactly, but in practice doesn't it amount to the same type of thinking?

And was their a proposed alternative view, or simply the usual criticisms without any real substance?
Title: Re: Quick Eucharist question....
Post by: FormerReformer on September 24, 2011, 10:57:59 AM
After the triple-amen at the epiklesis, you are required to refer to the "wine" as the Precious Blood of Christ and the "bread" as the Precious Body of Christ (and mean it).

Didn't St. Nicholas Cabasilas and others criticize those under Rome for the idea that there was some particular moment (and some particular verbal cue) at which the bread and wine became body and blood?  I know this is not what you are saying exactly, but in practice doesn't it amount to the same type of thinking?

Isn't the epiclesis the point, though, where worship of the elements is no longer artolatry? We might say at any point between the beginning of the prayers of communion and the epiclesis that the elements are in the process of becoming the Body and Blood, but the epiclesis is the point where we know that it is the Body and Blood.
Title: Re: Quick Eucharist question....
Post by: Asteriktos on September 24, 2011, 01:58:34 PM
Didn't St. Nicholas Cabasilas and others criticize those under Rome for the idea that there was some particular moment (and some particular verbal cue) at which the bread and wine became body and blood?  I know this is not what you are saying exactly, but in practice doesn't it amount to the same type of thinking?

And was their a proposed alternative view, or simply the usual criticisms without any real substance?

I don't remember, been too long since I read it. St. Nicholas was hardly a rabid and unthinking critic of "the west," though. As someone (Elijahmaria?) has shown, he actually advocated theological concepts and language that was, at times, closer to what we think of as western rather than eastern.

Isn't the epiclesis the point, though, where worship of the elements is no longer artolatry? We might say at any point between the beginning of the prayers of communion and the epiclesis that the elements are in the process of becoming the Body and Blood, but the epiclesis is the point where we know that it is the Body and Blood.

Yeah maybe... not sure... though that's an interesting way of thinking about it, and probably a good middle path.
Title: Re: Quick Eucharist question....
Post by: Alveus Lacuna on September 24, 2011, 04:36:13 PM
Isn't the epiclesis the point, though, where worship of the elements is no longer artolatry? We might say at any point between the beginning of the prayers of communion and the epiclesis that the elements are in the process of becoming the Body and Blood, but the epiclesis is the point where we know that it is the Body and Blood.

Somebody care to spell out these points in the liturgy to me by using points in the prayers?