OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 22, 2014, 09:53:03 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Lord, They say you are not in the Catholic Sacraments ¿What do you say?  (Read 13783 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,423


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #135 on: January 24, 2010, 02:39:44 AM »


The tangent on the application of the label "Romanist" to Catholics has been moved to Orthodox-Other Christian Private Discussions.

Deusveritasest Wants to Offend Catholics by Calling Them Romanists!


What's up with the thread title? I explicitly said that I am using this terminology with no interest or intention in offending those in union with Rome.
If you want to take that up with me, please do so in a private message, for I will not entertain such questions of my moderatorial decisions here.  Thank you.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: BZZT
Posts: 29,219


« Reply #136 on: January 24, 2010, 02:42:21 AM »


The tangent on the application of the label "Romanist" to Catholics has been moved to Orthodox-Other Christian Private Discussions.

Deusveritasest Wants to Offend Catholics by Calling Them Romanists!


What's up with the thread title? I explicitly said that I am using this terminology with no interest or intention in offending those in union with Rome.

The mods like to come up with snappy titles. For example, one time a mod split some posts off a thread and named the new thread "All These People Would Rather Talk About Gay Marriage Than Stay On Topic". The funny part in that case was that the same mod who came up with the title also had made posts that got put into the new thread. I guess even mods who get frustrated about others staying on topic going off topic can't always stay on topic themselves Cheesy

EDIT--I clarified what I meant, striking out what I had previously said.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 02:58:31 AM by Asteriktos » Logged
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #137 on: January 24, 2010, 02:53:44 AM »

I don't really see how a video can be an argument for validity... Every religion out there can produce "miracles" and "signs" that their religion is the true one...

If the Orthodox Church says your sacraments are not valid, then that is the way it is.

I feel like this thread was just created to create an argument against Orthodoxy and for Catholicism...
And for what purpose, I don't know.  We don't care what the Vatican says about our Holy Mysteries.  Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?
Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?

Because many of You go out there saying that they are fake, then someone has to heal the offence, and as I am unable to do that healing, and no priest is able to do it, because it comes to be a matter of what you believe and what we believe, then, We come to the point where the only one who shows the truth is Our Lord, acting directly by miracles.

Now, I also read that some guys here come with the idea that miracles are not valid, as they can be created by any religion. My answer would be that, such idea can be right if we were talking of the invocation of a false god to perform such an act. This is not the case here, where We the Catholic Church, are praying to God to perform the Transformation of our presents into the body and blood of our Lord by his Holy Spirit, as we were taught by the Saints Apostles Peter and Paul. Then the principle of insufficiency of miracles to prove the true comes to be invalid, due to the fact that this miracle is attributed to the true God whom we pray. 

Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics see this as a sign came from our Lord that induces us to believe stronger in the Holiness of the Eucharist of the true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church. 

You haven’t read at all, that I ever attempted to disqualify the sacrament of Orthodoxy, have you? But for sure, if I can show you a miracle either you trust it or not, that proves that God is present in Catholic Church Eucharist, I will do it as I did, that way I will be released of any responsibility of not showing you the true. And from now and hence forth you will not be able to say that you didn’t know it, or that no one spoke of this to you.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 02:59:02 AM by Alonso_castillo » Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #138 on: January 24, 2010, 03:00:52 AM »

I don't really see how a video can be an argument for validity... Every religion out there can produce "miracles" and "signs" that their religion is the true one...

If the Orthodox Church says your sacraments are not valid, then that is the way it is.

I feel like this thread was just created to create an argument against Orthodoxy and for Catholicism...
And for what purpose, I don't know.  We don't care what the Vatican says about our Holy Mysteries.  Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?
Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?

Because many of You go out there saying that they are fake, then someone has to heal the offence, and as I am unable to do that healing, and no priest is able to do it, because it comes to be a matter of what you believe and what we believe, then, We come to the point where the only one who shows the truth is Our Lord, acting directly by miracles.

Now, I also read that some guys here come with the idea that miracles are not valid, as they can be created by any religion. My answer would be that, such idea can be right if we were talking of the invocation of a false god to perform such an act. This is not the case here, where We the Catholic Church, are praying to God to perform the Transformation of our presents into the body and blood of our Lord by his Holy Spirit, as we were taught by the Saints Apostles Peter and Paul. Then the principle of insufficiency of miracles to prove the true comes to be invalid, due to the fact that this miracle is attributed to the true God whom we pray. 

Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics see this as a sign came from our Lord that induces us to believe stronger in the Holiness of the Eucharist of the true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church. 

You haven’t read at all, that I ever attempted to disqualify the sacrament of Orthodoxy, have you? But for sure, if I can show you a miracle either you trust it or not, that proves that God is present in Catholic Church Eucharist, I will do it as I did, that way I will be released of any responsibility of not showing you the true. And from now and hence forth you will not be able to say that you didn’t know it, or that no one spoke of this to you.


If you are in heresy and in schism from the Church and don't even properly understand God as the Orthodox do, Satan can very well perform miracles for you for the sake of egging you on deeper into your errors.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #139 on: January 24, 2010, 03:34:54 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.
Logged
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #140 on: January 24, 2010, 03:37:50 AM »

If you are in heresy and in schism from the Church and don't even properly understand God as the Orthodox do, Satan can very well perform miracles for you for the sake of egging you on deeper into your errors.
Miracles are performed to help people to believe, in the Lord, as we can see in the next verses.

John 2:11
John 2:23
John 3:22
John 4:48
John 6:2
John 9:16
John 11:47
John 12:37
John 20:30
Acts 2:18-19
Acts 2:43

We can say the same of you about evil performing miracles to cheat you. Though we don’t do it anymore, the miracle that is shown in the video is performed by the disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ, No one priest can claim to be the performer of such a miracle, and no one claims the miracle for himself, ¿Is the name of the fathers written in the video that would eventually be interpreted as making them to be falsely proud of themselves? No.

You base your principle in the next verses, though you miss something, they are referring to the antichrists who will proclaim themselves prophets and messiah, but in the video, we don’t see such a thing. No name is claiming the miracle to himself, rather this miracle is attributed to God, and the antichrist won’t do such thing.  
 
Mat 24:24
Mar 13:22
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #141 on: January 24, 2010, 03:39:16 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #142 on: January 24, 2010, 03:41:16 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #143 on: January 24, 2010, 03:42:17 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?

If there is no epiclesis in the Catholic Mass, does the bread remain bread and the wine remain wine?  Would it not be heresy for you to say that?
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #144 on: January 24, 2010, 03:54:11 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,481



« Reply #145 on: January 24, 2010, 07:38:05 AM »

It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution

Ahoy, Catholics! I've understanded that the Assyrian liturgy doesn't include the Words of Institution. What Rome says about validity of their Eucharist? I'm also curious whether the Chaldean Catholics have inserted the Words of Institution into their liturgy.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 07:39:53 AM by Alpo » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #146 on: January 24, 2010, 08:33:37 AM »

It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution

Ahoy, Catholics! I've understanded that the Assyrian liturgy doesn't include the Words of Institution. What Rome says about validity of their Eucharist?

This has been discused. Rome has decided that 1) the intention to consecrate and transform the elements is evident throughout their Liturgy.  So Rome has made an exception to the requirement for the actual Words of Institution.   2) They have also advanced the argument that the Words of Institution are "scattered" in the body of the Eucharistic Canon - an argument I find a little odd!

Quote
I'm also curious whether the Chaldean Catholics have inserted the Words of Institution into their liturgy.

Rome has asked them to include the Words of Institution, on a voluntary basis.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #147 on: January 24, 2010, 08:44:51 AM »

Consecration in the Anaphora of Addai & Mari

Daniel J. Castellano (2007)

"In 2001, seven years after the Vatican's common declaration of faith with the (formerly Nestorian) Assyrian Church of the East, the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity issued its Guidelines for admission to the Eucharist between the Chaldean Church and the Assyrian Church of the East, in order to improve relations between Catholics and schismatics of the Chaldean rite. This document is most noted for its surprising affrimation of the sacramental validity of the Assyrian anaphora of Addai and Mari, a Eucharistic Prayer that does not literally recount the words of Christ at the Last Supper. The product of years of careful analysis, this declaration has been widely misinterpreted, though understandably, as denying the Church's millennial doctrine that the words of Christ spoken by the priest are the form of the sacrament that effects transubstantiation.

"To correct such misinterpretations, and to appreciate the real value of this document, we need only examine the Pontifical Council's words more carefully, in light of what is known about the anaphora in question. First of all, the Council does not say that the anaphora lacks an Institution Narrative, only that it lacks a "coherent Institution Narrative". The Council acknowledges that scholars are uncertain whether the Anaphora of Addai and Mari originally contained a more coherent Institution Narrative. We will examine this question ourselves later, but the Council does not presume to decide this intractable historical question. "The validity of the Eucharist celebrated with the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, therefore, should not be based on historical but on doctrinal arguments."

"Far from setting aside the Church's traditional doctrine, the Pontifical Council explicitly cites the Council of Florence: "The form of this sacrament are the words of the Saviour with which he effected this sacrament. A priest speaking in the person of Christ effects this sacrament. For, in virtue of those words, the substance of bread is changed into the body of Christ and the substance of wine into his blood." This solemn definition by the Council of Florence does not preclude variations in the specific wording of the Institution, as should be evident from the fact that such variations exist among valid orthodox rites, even to the extent of recounting the Institution in the third person. While the Church has no power to change the substance of the sacraments, "the Church does have the power to determine their concrete shaping, regarding both their sacramental sign (materia) and their words of administration (forma)," assuming such changes do not alter the substance of the sacrament.

"The doctrinal question before the Pontifical Council is whether the incoherent verbal form of the anaphora's Institution Narrative retains the substance of the sacrament. The Council decides that the "the words of the Institution are not absent in the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, but explicitly mentioned in a dispersed way, from the beginning to the end, in the most important passages of the Anaphora." [Emphasis added.] Thus the Council upholds the traditional requirement that the words of Institution must be explicitly present in a valid Eucharistic Prayer. The oddity of the Anaphora of Addai and Mari is that these words are dispersed throughout the liturgy, but are nonetheless explicitly present."

To continue reading please go to
http://www.arcaneknowledge.org/catholic/addai.htm
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #148 on: January 24, 2010, 09:20:04 AM »

It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution

Ahoy, Catholics! I've understanded that the Assyrian liturgy doesn't include the Words of Institution. What Rome says about validity of their Eucharist?

This has been discused. Rome has decided that 1) the intention to consecrate and transform the elements is evident throughout their Liturgy.  So Rome has made an exception to the requirement for the actual Words of Institution.   2) They have also advanced the argument that the Words of Institution are "scattered" in the body of the Eucharistic Canon - an argument I find a little odd!

Quote
I'm also curious whether the Chaldean Catholics have inserted the Words of Institution into their liturgy.

Rome has asked them to include the Words of Institution, on a voluntary basis.
Latinization?

This is a clear difference between the Western Rite Orthodox and the Vatican:what the latter so much as emphasized (and fought with us over for centuries) they say designate as "voluntary": only submission to the Supreme Pontiff of Rome is not voluntary.  For the WRO, there is a question about the epiclesis, so one is inserted to make it clear, and its not "voluntary." We must be reading off the same page if we are, and we are, of the same Faith.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 09:23:45 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #149 on: January 24, 2010, 09:25:25 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #150 on: January 24, 2010, 09:27:00 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?

If there is no epiclesis in the Catholic Mass, does the bread remain bread and the wine remain wine?  Would it not be heresy for you to say that?

I was wondering that too, given all the fighting the Vatican has done against us over the epiclesis in the past.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #151 on: January 24, 2010, 09:43:26 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?

If there is no epiclesis in the Catholic Mass, does the bread remain bread and the wine remain wine?  Would it not be heresy for you to say that?

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

I hope that it is understand the use I am giving as communly understood now a days, I am not refering a post conscration prayer, as orthodox do.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 09:49:57 AM by Alonso_castillo » Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #152 on: January 24, 2010, 09:51:01 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #153 on: January 24, 2010, 09:53:45 AM »

I don't really see how a video can be an argument for validity... Every religion out there can produce "miracles" and "signs" that their religion is the true one...

If the Orthodox Church says your sacraments are not valid, then that is the way it is.

I feel like this thread was just created to create an argument against Orthodoxy and for Catholicism...
And for what purpose, I don't know.  We don't care what the Vatican says about our Holy Mysteries.  Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?
Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?

Because many of You go out there saying that they are fake,
So?  
Quote
then someone has to heal the offence, and as I am unable to do that healing, and no priest is able to do it, because it comes to be a matter of what you believe and what we believe, then, We come to the point where the only one who shows the truth is Our Lord, acting directly by miracles.
Only an evil and adulterous generation craves a sign. Matthew 12:39.  The Fathers teach that if you see a miracle, ignore it, advice that should have been heeded, for instance, at Fatima.  When I embraced Orthodoxy, I prayed that I not see a miracle until my Faith didn't need it.  That came less than three years later.

Quote
Now, I also read that some guys here come with the idea that miracles are not valid, as they can be created by any religion. My answer would be that, such idea can be right if we were talking of the invocation of a false god to perform such an act. This is not the case here, where We the Catholic Church, are praying to God to perform the Transformation of our presents into the body and blood of our Lord by his Holy Spirit, as we were taught by the Saints Apostles Peter and Paul.

That's not what your Vatican has been teaching: we pointed out the weakness of the explicit epiclesis in the Roman mass, and they argued it wasn't necessary.

Quote
Then the principle of insufficiency of miracles to prove the true comes to be invalid, due to the fact that this miracle is attributed to the true God whom we pray. 

The Protestants (especially the Televangelists) pray to the same God, and the Muslims and Jews claim to too.  You all can't be right.

Quote
Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics see this as a sign came from our Lord that induces us to believe stronger in the Holiness of the Eucharist of the true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church. 

Yes, the Orthodox Catholic Church, the one who has taught consistently the moment of the epiclesis.

Quote
You haven’t read at all, that I ever attempted to disqualify the sacrament of Orthodoxy, have you?

Not relevent.  Our One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church doesn't need your validation.  Consequently we are not obliged to reciprocate if you give it.

Quote
But for sure, if I can show you a miracle either you trust it or not, that proves that God is present in Catholic Church Eucharist, I will do it as I did, that way I will be released of any responsibility of not showing you the true. And from now and hence forth you will not be able to say that you didn’t know it, or that no one spoke of this to you.

Only an evil and adulterous generation craves a sign. Matthew 12:39.

Well, at least you eased your conscience.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #154 on: January 24, 2010, 09:54:32 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Yes, I am aware of that: do you pray "Our Pope who art in Heaven?"
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #155 on: January 24, 2010, 09:55:46 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?

If there is no epiclesis in the Catholic Mass, does the bread remain bread and the wine remain wine?  Would it not be heresy for you to say that?

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

I hope that it is understand the use I am giving as communly understood now a days, I am not refering a post conscration prayer, as orthodox do.
It is not a post consecration prayer: it is THE consecration prayer.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #156 on: January 24, 2010, 09:58:04 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Yes, I am aware of that: do you pray "Our Pope who art in Heaven?"

We don't create confusion of terms.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 10:02:36 AM by Alonso_castillo » Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #157 on: January 24, 2010, 10:05:50 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Yes, I am aware of that: do you pray "Our Pope who art in Heaven?"

We don't create confusion of terms.
filioque

I remember arguing with a guy on CAF who insisted that pope was in the Bible because it means father, and then proceeded to paste a concordance of the word Father in the NT.  Reading "pope" for "father" made John 8:44 interesting reading indeed! Tongue
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 10:12:08 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #158 on: January 24, 2010, 10:12:10 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?

If there is no epiclesis in the Catholic Mass, does the bread remain bread and the wine remain wine?  Would it not be heresy for you to say that?

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

I hope that it is understand the use I am giving as communly understood now a days, I am not refering a post conscration prayer, as orthodox do.
It is not a post consecration prayer: it is THE consecration prayer.
You and I will never end in a commun point.  ( I am not saying tha "You" means  "the orthodox church" or thet "I" means (the Catholic Church)
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 10:18:25 AM by Alonso_castillo » Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #159 on: January 24, 2010, 10:16:48 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Yes, I am aware of that: do you pray "Our Pope who art in Heaven?"

We don't create confusion of terms.
filioque

I remember arguing with a guy on CAF who insisted that pope was in the Bible because it means father, and then proceeded to paste a concordance of the word Father in the NT.  Reading "pope" for "father" made John 8:44 interesting reading indeed! Tongue

For the words you speak I imagine that you give him credit as speakig excathedra. I mean, it seams that you are giving to understand that this guy was speaking with authority of all the church. do you?

I dont think you ever believe him to be speaking in the name of the Catholic Church. So your point is ?
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #160 on: January 24, 2010, 10:19:59 AM »

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

When IS that moment?

As far as I aware the invocation of the Holy Spirit in the modern Roman Mass occurs before the Words of Institution.   Does this mean that the change of the bread and wine takes place before the priest says, 'This is my body... etc."

Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #161 on: January 24, 2010, 04:24:20 PM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Yes, I am aware of that: do you pray "Our Pope who art in Heaven?"

We don't create confusion of terms.
filioque

I remember arguing with a guy on CAF who insisted that pope was in the Bible because it means father, and then proceeded to paste a concordance of the word Father in the NT.  Reading "pope" for "father" made John 8:44 interesting reading indeed! Tongue

For the words you speak I imagine that you give him credit as speakig excathedra. I mean, it seams that you are giving to understand that this guy was speaking with authority of all the church. do you?

I dont think you ever believe him to be speaking in the name of the Catholic Church. So your point is ?
You tried to make the same point in trying to deal with the fact that neither the word nor concept of "Pope" in the sense of "Supreme Roman Pontiff" is found in the Bible. So what authority do you speak with?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,127


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #162 on: January 24, 2010, 04:34:06 PM »

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

When IS that moment?

As far as I aware the invocation of the Holy Spirit in the modern Roman Mass occurs before the Words of Institution.   Does this mean that the change of the bread and wine takes place before the priest says, 'This is my body... etc."


It happens at the words of institution. We are with St. John Chrysostem on this one.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #163 on: January 24, 2010, 04:38:38 PM »

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

When IS that moment?

As far as I aware the invocation of the Holy Spirit in the modern Roman Mass occurs before the Words of Institution.   Does this mean that the change of the bread and wine takes place before the priest says, 'This is my body... etc."


It happens at the words of institution. We are with St. John Chrysostem on this one.
Then you would be outside the consensus of the Church on this one.  What specifically do you have in mind about St. John?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #164 on: January 24, 2010, 04:51:45 PM »

If you are in heresy and in schism from the Church and don't even properly understand God as the Orthodox do, Satan can very well perform miracles for you for the sake of egging you on deeper into your errors.
Miracles are performed to help people to believe, in the Lord, as we can see in the next verses.

John 2:11
John 2:23
John 3:22
John 4:48
John 6:2
John 9:16
John 11:47
John 12:37
John 20:30
Acts 2:18-19
Acts 2:43

We can say the same of you about evil performing miracles to cheat you. Though we don’t do it anymore, the miracle that is shown in the video is performed by the disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ, No one priest can claim to be the performer of such a miracle, and no one claims the miracle for himself, ¿Is the name of the fathers written in the video that would eventually be interpreted as making them to be falsely proud of themselves? No.

You base your principle in the next verses, though you miss something, they are referring to the antichrists who will proclaim themselves prophets and messiah, but in the video, we don’t see such a thing. No name is claiming the miracle to himself, rather this miracle is attributed to God, and the antichrist won’t do such thing.  
 
Mat 24:24
Mar 13:22


Like I said, given that you're not really following God in the way that the original Christians were, it's very clear that Satan can perform signs for you to reassure you in your heresy and thus lead you away from possibly returning to the Church.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #165 on: January 24, 2010, 04:53:05 PM »

It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution

Ahoy, Catholics! I've understanded that the Assyrian liturgy doesn't include the Words of Institution. What Rome says about validity of their Eucharist?

Rome has decided that there is an "implicit Words of Institution" present in their Liturgy and that it is thus still valid.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,127


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #166 on: January 24, 2010, 04:54:06 PM »

It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution

Ahoy, Catholics! I've understanded that the Assyrian liturgy doesn't include the Words of Institution. What Rome says about validity of their Eucharist?

Rome has decided that there is an "implicit Words of Institution" present in their Liturgy and that it is thus still valid.
Yup, and those assyrians who entered into the Catholic Church are required to use the words of institution.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
samkim
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 735



« Reply #167 on: January 24, 2010, 07:12:36 PM »

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

When IS that moment?

As far as I aware the invocation of the Holy Spirit in the modern Roman Mass occurs before the Words of Institution.   Does this mean that the change of the bread and wine takes place before the priest says, 'This is my body... etc."


It happens at the words of institution. We are with St. John Chrysostem on this one.
Then you would be outside the consensus of the Church on this one.  What specifically do you have in mind about St. John?

Well, the Epiklesis in St. Basil's liturgy seems to suggest that the transmutation of the gifts already happened. Perhaps in the words of institution? No Orthodox  would deny the importance of the words of institution. They seem to me equally important to the Epiklesis. I think my priest told me this once.
Logged

주 예수 그리스도 하느님의 아들이시여 저 이 죄인을 불쌍히 여기소서.
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,180


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #168 on: January 24, 2010, 08:09:38 PM »

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

When IS that moment?

As far as I aware the invocation of the Holy Spirit in the modern Roman Mass occurs before the Words of Institution.   Does this mean that the change of the bread and wine takes place before the priest says, 'This is my body... etc."


It happens at the words of institution. We are with St. John Chrysostem on this one.
Then you would be outside the consensus of the Church on this one.  What specifically do you have in mind about St. John?

Well, the Epiklesis in St. Basil's liturgy seems to suggest that the transmutation of the gifts already happened. Perhaps in the words of institution? No Orthodox  would deny the importance of the words of institution. They seem to me equally important to the Epiklesis. I think my priest told me this once.

The Latin Church has always insisted (since the high middle ages at least) that it is at the so-called words of institution that the elements are completely changed into the Body and Blood of our Lord.  The Orthodox have insisted that this change is not accomplished until the epiklesis, although they acknowledge that the entire liturgy up until that point, including the words of institution, are important in making the change happen.  Moreover, St. Nicholas Cabasilas accuses the Latins of being disingenuous, saying that they know "perfectly well" that they use an ancient prayer in their liturgy that accomplishes the same thing as an epiklesis, that being the supplices te rogamus prayer as follows:  "We humbly beseech thee, almighty God, command that these things be carried by the hands of thy Angel to thy altar on high before the sight of thy divine majesty: that so many of us as shall by this partaking at the altar receive the most holy Body and Blood of thy Son, may be fulfilled with all grace and heavenly benediction.  Through the same Christ our Lord." (Please see A Commentary on the Divine Liturgy by Nicholas Cabasilas, pages 76-77.)
(Interestingly, another form of this primitive "implicit epiklesis" continues to exist as a remnant in the litany after "and all mankind" in the Orthodox liturgy.)  The supplices te rogamus is after the words of institution in the Tridentine rite.  In the Novus Ordo, I think a form of it is often included.  However, since Vatican II the Latin Church has also created a new series of epiklesi that may be used, some more explicit than others, that have been inserted before the words of institution.  (Is the "new" Novus Ordo being used in the U.S. yet?  I live in Canada, and I don't think it will come into use here, at least not right away, so I may be a bit behind in terms of Roman Catholic usage in the rest of the English speaking world.)  I suppose that this has been done so that they can continue to insist that they have always said that it is the words of institution that effect the change in the elements, while at the same time satisfying critics who want to see an epiklesis included. 
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #169 on: January 24, 2010, 08:26:18 PM »


Well, the Epiklesis in St. Basil's liturgy seems to suggest that the transmutation of the gifts already happened.

How so?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
samkim
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 735



« Reply #170 on: January 24, 2010, 08:54:35 PM »


Well, the Epiklesis in St. Basil's liturgy seems to suggest that the transmutation of the gifts already happened.

How so?

In St. John Chrysostom's epiklesis, the priest asks the gifts to be changed, while in St. Basil's the priest asks the gifts to be shown to have been the body and blood of Christ. From the GOARCH site, it looks like they substituted the Basilian epiklesis with the Johanine.

From the OCA site:
Quote
After the elevation of the eucharistic gifts to the Father, the celebrant of the Divine Liturgy prays for the Holy Spirit to come upon them, and upon all of the people, and to change (or as the Liturgy of St. Basil says, to show) the bread and wine offered in remembrance of Christ to be the very Body and Blood of the Lord.


My Priest has commented that St. Basil's epiklesis is "much weaker."
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 08:57:58 PM by samkim » Logged

주 예수 그리스도 하느님의 아들이시여 저 이 죄인을 불쌍히 여기소서.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #171 on: January 24, 2010, 09:00:34 PM »

Maybe the Liturgy of Basil actually expresses a different theory of the Real Presence.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
AlexanderOfBergamo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Traditionalist Christian
Jurisdiction: The Original First Millennium Church
Posts: 706


« Reply #172 on: January 25, 2010, 08:39:01 AM »

Maybe the Liturgy of Basil actually expresses a different theory of the Real Presence.

I can answer to all your doubts using a reliable Catholic source on the matter. This is a part of article "The Blessed Eucharist as a Sacrament" facing the problem of the role and position of the Epiklesis:

Quote
Not only did such renowned Fathers as Justin (First Apology 66), Irenæus (Against Heresies V.2.3), Gregory of Nyssa (The Great Catechism, no. 37), Chrysostom (Hom. i, de prod. Judæ, n. 6), and John Damascene (Exposition of the Faith IV.13) hold this view, but the ancient Greek Liturgies bear testimony to it, so that Cardinal Bessarion in 1439 at Florence called the attention of his fellow-countrymen to the fact, that as soon as the words of Institution have been pronounced, supreme homage and adoration are due to the Holy Eucharist, even though the famous Epiklesis follows some time after.

Quote
The venerable antiquity of the Oriental Epiklesis, its peculiar position in the Canon of the Mass, and its interior spiritual unction, oblige the theologian to determine its dogmatic value and to account for its use. Take, for instance, the Epiklesis of the Ethiopian Liturgy: "We implore and beseech Thee, O Lord, to send forth the Holy Spirit and His Power upon this Bread and Chalice and convert them into the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ." Since this prayer always follows after the words of Institution have been pronounced, the theological question arises, as to how it may be made to harmonize with the words of Christ, which alone possess the consecrated power. Two explanations have been suggested which, however, can be merged in one. The first view considers the Epiklesis to be a mere declaration of the fact, that the conversion has already taken place, and that in the conversion just as essential a part is to be attributed to the Holy Spirit as Co-Consecrator as in the allied mystery of the Incarnation. Since, however, because of the brevity of the actual instant of conversion, the part taken by the Holy Spirit could not be expressed, the Epiklesis takes us back in imagination to the precious moment and regards the Consecration as just about to occur. A similar purely psychological retrospective transfer is met with in other portions of the Liturgy, as in the Mass for the Dead, wherein the Church prays for the departed as if they were still upon their bed of agony and could still be rescued from the gates of hell. Thus considered, the Epiklesis refers us back to the Consecration as the center about which all the significance contained in its words revolves. A second explanation is based, not upon the enactedConsecration, but upon the approaching Communion, inasmuch as the latter, being the effective means of uniting us more closely in the organized body of the Church, brings forth in our hearts the mystical Christ, as is read in the Roman Canon of the Mass: "Ut nobis corpus et sanguis fiat", i.e. that it may be made for us the body and blood. It was in this purely mystical manner that the Greeks themselves explained the meaning of the Epiklesis at the Council of Florence (Mansi, Collect. Concil., XXXI, 106). Yet since much more is contained in the plain words than this true and deep mysticism, it is desirable to combine both explanations into one, and so we regard the Epiklesis, both in point of liturgy and of time, as the significant connecting link, placed midway between the Consecration and the Communion in order to emphasize the part taken by the Holy Spirit in the Consecration of bread and wine, and, on the other hand, with the help of the same Holy Spirit to obtain the realization of the true Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ by their fruitful effects on both priest and people.

I will provide here, for the sake of clarity, the two best proof texts used in the first quotation to demonstrate that the transubstantiation occurs at the Words of Institution for at least two Church Fathers, Justin martyr and Gregory of Nyssa (the other two texts I judged to be weak proofs so let's ignore them, they're useless for our purposes):

Quote
And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία  [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.  For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn. (Justin martyr, First Apology, 66)

Quote
For that Body was once, by implication, bread, but has been consecrated by the inhabitation of the Word that tabernacled in the flesh. Therefore, from the same cause as that by which the bread that was transformed in that Body was changed to a Divine potency, a similar result takes place now. For as in that case, too, the grace of the Word used to make holy the Body, the substance of which came of the bread, and in a manner was itself bread, so also in this case the bread, as says the Apostle, "is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer"; not that it advances by the process of eating  to the stage of passing into the body of the Word, but it is at once changed into the body by means of the Word, as the Word itself said, "This is My Body." (The Great Catechism Part III, 37, Gregory of Nyssa)

Hope this helps in clarifying the position of the Catholic Church as much as possible.

In Christ,   Alex
Logged

"Also in the Catholic Church itself we take great care that we hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and properly Catholic" (St. Vincent of Lérins, "The Commonitory")
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #173 on: January 25, 2010, 09:46:07 AM »


Well, the Epiklesis in St. Basil's liturgy seems to suggest that the transmutation of the gifts already happened.

How so?

In St. John Chrysostom's epiklesis, the priest asks the gifts to be changed, while in St. Basil's the priest asks the gifts to be shown to have been the body and blood of Christ. From the GOARCH site, it looks like they substituted the Basilian epiklesis with the Johanine.

From the OCA site:
Quote
After the elevation of the eucharistic gifts to the Father, the celebrant of the Divine Liturgy prays for the Holy Spirit to come upon them, and upon all of the people, and to change (or as the Liturgy of St. Basil says, to show) the bread and wine offered in remembrance of Christ to be the very Body and Blood of the Lord.


My Priest has commented that St. Basil's epiklesis is "much weaker."

This is what we are accustomed to in Saint Basil's Liturgy in the Russian and Serbian Churches.  I do not know if it is identical to what is said in the Greek Churches.

After the words of institution and while the deacon points to the diskos and the holy Bread, the priest says:

"For this bread is in very truth the precious Body of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ"

and then he says while the deacon is pointing to the chalice:

"For this chalice is truly the precious Blood of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ which was poured out for the life of the world"

Deacon:  "Bless both, Master."

"Transmuting them by thy Holy Spirit."

This "transmuting them by thy Holy Spirit" is the exact phrase also used in the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom.  I do not really see how it is "weaker" in Saint Basil's than Saint John's Liturgy.

« Last Edit: January 25, 2010, 09:48:22 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,180


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #174 on: January 25, 2010, 12:48:22 PM »

This "transmuting them by thy Holy Spirit" is the exact phrase also used in the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom.  I do not really see how it is "weaker" in Saint Basil's than Saint John's Liturgy.

AFAIK this phrase represents a very late addition to the Liturgy of St. Basil which was inserted to "Chrysostomize" it.  In any event, referring to the epiklesis of St. Basil as "weaker" might not be the best option.  It might be better to say that the epiklesis is not quite as explicit as that of St. John, while still showing very clearly that it is only through the presence of the Holy Spirit that the gifts can be transformed.  


I can answer to all your doubts using a reliable Catholic source on the matter. This is a part of article "The Blessed Eucharist as a Sacrament" facing the problem of the role and position of the Epiklesis:

Quote
Not only did such renowned Fathers as Justin (First Apology 66), Irenæus (Against Heresies V.2.3), Gregory of Nyssa (The Great Catechism, no. 37), Chrysostom (Hom. i, de prod. Judæ, n. 6), and John Damascene (Exposition of the Faith IV.13) hold this view, but the ancient Greek Liturgies bear testimony to it, so that Cardinal Bessarion in 1439 at Florence called the attention of his fellow-countrymen to the fact, that as soon as the words of Institution have been pronounced, supreme homage and adoration are due to the Holy Eucharist, even though the famous Epiklesis follows some time after.

Quote
The venerable antiquity of the Oriental Epiklesis, its peculiar position in the Canon of the Mass, and its interior spiritual unction, oblige the theologian to determine its dogmatic value and to account for its use. Take, for instance, the Epiklesis of the Ethiopian Liturgy: "We implore and beseech Thee, O Lord, to send forth the Holy Spirit and His Power upon this Bread and Chalice and convert them into the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ." Since this prayer always follows after the words of Institution have been pronounced, the theological question arises, as to how it may be made to harmonize with the words of Christ, which alone possess the consecrated power. Two explanations have been suggested which, however, can be merged in one. The first view considers the Epiklesis to be a mere declaration of the fact, that the conversion has already taken place, and that in the conversion just as essential a part is to be attributed to the Holy Spirit as Co-Consecrator as in the allied mystery of the Incarnation. Since, however, because of the brevity of the actual instant of conversion, the part taken by the Holy Spirit could not be expressed, the Epiklesis takes us back in imagination to the precious moment and regards the Consecration as just about to occur. A similar purely psychological retrospective transfer is met with in other portions of the Liturgy, as in the Mass for the Dead, wherein the Church prays for the departed as if they were still upon their bed of agony and could still be rescued from the gates of hell. Thus considered, the Epiklesis refers us back to the Consecration as the center about which all the significance contained in its words revolves. A second explanation is based, not upon the enactedConsecration, but upon the approaching Communion, inasmuch as the latter, being the effective means of uniting us more closely in the organized body of the Church, brings forth in our hearts the mystical Christ, as is read in the Roman Canon of the Mass: "Ut nobis corpus et sanguis fiat", i.e. that it may be made for us the body and blood. It was in this purely mystical manner that the Greeks themselves explained the meaning of the Epiklesis at the Council of Florence (Mansi, Collect. Concil., XXXI, 106). Yet since much more is contained in the plain words than this true and deep mysticism, it is desirable to combine both explanations into one, and so we regard the Epiklesis, both in point of liturgy and of time, as the significant connecting link, placed midway between the Consecration and the Communion in order to emphasize the part taken by the Holy Spirit in the Consecration of bread and wine, and, on the other hand, with the help of the same Holy Spirit to obtain the realization of the true Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ by their fruitful effects on both priest and people.

I will provide here, for the sake of clarity, the two best proof texts used in the first quotation to demonstrate that the transubstantiation occurs at the Words of Institution for at least two Church Fathers, Justin martyr and Gregory of Nyssa (the other two texts I judged to be weak proofs so let's ignore them, they're useless for our purposes):

Quote
And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία  [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.  For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn. (Justin martyr, First Apology, 66)

Quote
For that Body was once, by implication, bread, but has been consecrated by the inhabitation of the Word that tabernacled in the flesh. Therefore, from the same cause as that by which the bread that was transformed in that Body was changed to a Divine potency, a similar result takes place now. For as in that case, too, the grace of the Word used to make holy the Body, the substance of which came of the bread, and in a manner was itself bread, so also in this case the bread, as says the Apostle, "is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer"; not that it advances by the process of eating  to the stage of passing into the body of the Word, but it is at once changed into the body by means of the Word, as the Word itself said, "This is My Body." (The Great Catechism Part III, 37, Gregory of Nyssa)

Hope this helps in clarifying the position of the Catholic Church as much as possible.

In Christ,   Alex

Well, perhaps it helps clarify that some Catholic scholars might not be willing to accept Orthodox arguments on this issue.  From our point of view, neither of the quotes you have provided conclusively "proves" anything, though the quote from St. Gregory does provide some food for thought.  The quotes do show that the so-called words of institution are a very important component involved in consecrating the gifts.  But what proof-texting like this cannot demonstrate is how the Christian East has always been very concious that it is only by being in the Spirit that the liturgy can be accomplished.  As time went on, more and more explicit references to the Holy Spirit were added to Eastern liturgy.  Liturgical scholars of all confessions are generally united in the belief that non-acknowledgement of the presence of the Spirit is a problem in Western liturgy.

In any event, why do you think that the supplices te rogamus prayer was included in the old Latin mass?  Surely you don't believe that it is literally calling for an angel to come and take the gifts away into heaven, do you? I notice that you have not responded to any of  my arguments about it up until this point.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2010, 07:44:15 PM by Pravoslavbob » Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #175 on: January 25, 2010, 01:29:54 PM »

Don't the catholic clergy, claim they have it in their hands ,to make the change,when they say the words ,
of institution...They Have the Power.... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,127


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #176 on: January 25, 2010, 01:35:29 PM »

Don't the catholic clergy, claim they have it in their hands ,to make the change,when they say the words ,
of institution...They Have the Power.... Grin
Power from God, not themselves. They stand in persona Christi. You silly-willy.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #177 on: January 25, 2010, 07:01:38 PM »

If you are in heresy and in schism from the Church and don't even properly understand God as the Orthodox do, Satan can very well perform miracles for you for the sake of egging you on deeper into your errors.
Miracles are performed to help people to believe, in the Lord, as we can see in the next verses.

John 2:11
John 2:23
John 3:22
John 4:48
John 6:2
John 9:16
John 11:47
John 12:37
John 20:30
Acts 2:18-19
Acts 2:43

We can say the same of you about evil performing miracles to cheat you. Though we don’t do it anymore, the miracle that is shown in the video is performed by the disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ, No one priest can claim to be the performer of such a miracle, and no one claims the miracle for himself, ¿Is the name of the fathers written in the video that would eventually be interpreted as making them to be falsely proud of themselves? No.

You base your principle in the next verses, though you miss something, they are referring to the antichrists who will proclaim themselves prophets and messiah, but in the video, we don’t see such a thing. No name is claiming the miracle to himself, rather this miracle is attributed to God, and the antichrist won’t do such thing.  
 
Mat 24:24
Mar 13:22


Like I said, given that you're not really following God in the way that the original Christians were, it's very clear that Satan can perform signs for you to reassure you in your heresy and thus lead you away from possibly returning to the Church.

No matter what you ever say, I pray for union of Orthodoxy to Catholicism.
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
samkim
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 735



« Reply #178 on: January 25, 2010, 07:37:40 PM »

No matter what you ever say, I pray for union of Orthodoxy to Catholicism.

As do I. I pray that Rome will become Orthodox again. It would be good to take communion in an Orthodox Roman Catholic Church. But if you want to argue about the validity of RC sacraments, this isn't the best place to do it, it would seem.
Logged

주 예수 그리스도 하느님의 아들이시여 저 이 죄인을 불쌍히 여기소서.
samkim
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 735



« Reply #179 on: January 25, 2010, 07:40:13 PM »

This "transmuting them by thy Holy Spirit" is the exact phrase also used in the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom.  I do not really see how it is "weaker" in Saint Basil's than Saint John's Liturgy.

AFAIK this phrase represents a very late addition to the Liturgy of St. Basil which was inserted to "Chrysostomize" it.  In any event, referring to the epiklesis of St. Basil as "weaker" might not be the best option.  It might be better to say that the epiklesis is not quite as explicit as that of St. John, while still showing very clearly that it is only through the presence of the Holy Spirit that the gifts can be transformed.  


Interesting. I can't find the original text of the Liturgy any where online. I like St. Basil's.
Logged

주 예수 그리스도 하느님의 아들이시여 저 이 죄인을 불쌍히 여기소서.
Tags: epiclesis Roman communion anaphora Catholic sacraments 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.201 seconds with 72 queries.