OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 28, 2014, 04:34:21 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 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Eucharist questions  (Read 4508 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,305


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #45 on: August 07, 2011, 11:22:22 AM »

The Eucharist is a mystery, but we do know a few things.

Christ is there, He is present, and when we partake of Him, we partake not of mere flesh and blood, but Life-giving flesh and blood, on virtue of its unity with the divine nature.  The people of the Church, when they were baptized and chrismated, they become the Body of Christ.  Therefore, the Eucharist fortifies this body, and Christ's body and blood doesn't lose anything with it.  He is not digested, but it is we who are incorporated and fortified into His body.  It is a mystery in which the Church can only partake of, and even then, after proper honor and preparation.  It is how Christ incorporates us into Divine Life, and through us, we go back into the world trying to spread this divine life to others through examples and teachings, so that others may learn through us to "taste and see that the Lord is good" (Psalm 34:Cool.  This is not physical sustenance, but rather the ultimate divine blessing of utmost wonder for our lives as a whole.

The liturgy is also a very important aspect in all of this.  A perfect Eucharist is perfected by a perfect liturgy.  A liturgy that cleanses and elevates all our human and physical senses, our intellectual sense, our spiritual sense into the divine life.  There are icons and colors around you, icons especially of Christ for sight.  The hymns and readings for the hearing.  The touching of the icons, the candles, the hands of the priest, the touching of the Cross, the kiss of peace, and the touching of the hem of the altar as a remembrance to the lady who was healed by Christ just by merely touching a hem of his robe.  The engagement of our intellectual and social lives by the sermon of the priest.  The sweet smell of incense.  And the sweet taste of the Eucharist, a sense of real intimacy with Christ at the highest level.  All of these are to elevate us into the Holy of Holies and take this with us to the world that the world may be transformed.

Finally, if you eat, live, breathe, touch, smell, contemplate that the Lord is good, then your life would be an exemplary one.

how come he is not digested?the wine and bread are, they go into the stomach and than out of the body.how are they remaining in us or us in them(elements of blood and flesh) if they are eliminated out of our organism?

You said that people are incorporated into the Body of Christ through Communion.. What happens to those who commune with unworthiness?

I edited my post to make one small addition to hope that you may not ask that question, but apparently I added it too late.  I said:

Quote
Finally, if you eat, live, breathe, touch, smell, contemplate that the Lord is good (just as anyone would eat, live, breathe whatever their passions or careers are), then your life would be an exemplary one.

Let's say your passion is basketball.  Is it appropriate to ask someone how do you not digest a basketball if you "eat, live, and breathe" it?

In addition, the mechanics of how this union is achieved is a mystery.  We don't ask the question "how."  The Eucharist, in fact, all of faith, was never intended to be a "science."  The how in things is strictly the curiosity of other things in life.  But "how" in spirituality gets you nowhere.  Faith asks "why," and this why is extended to our practice and to our sacraments (mysteries).  The "how" in life is nice, but in faith, it is not nothing but vanity, and gets nowhere.  The important things in life never really cared about "how."  When your children, or your friend, or any loved one amazed by the loved you give him/her, do they ask, "how do you love me" or "why do you love me"?

So, when you eat, live, and breathe a passion in life, like trying to become like Christ, like God Incarnate Himself, this then becomes actualized concretely in the Eucharist.  By eating God's flesh and drinking God's blood and breathing in the Holy Spirit, you are vowing that you are actually living Christ's life to the fullest possible you can, as well as "proclaiming His death, confessing His resurrection and ascension into the highest heavens, and commemorating Him until He comes again" (commemorate here being living His life, not mere remembrance, as the Greek showed).  If this vow isn't taken seriously, then as St. Paul teaches, "For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body." (1 Cor. 11:29)

I don`t understand... if you already eat,drink,sleep, breath Christ what need you have for Eucharist from your point of view?

Well Christ decided it that way.  But perhaps He decided this was the best way for our sense of taste, the sense of intimacy, a sense of continuity with the OT practices, a sense of spiritual healing, and most certainly the sense of unity.  Could it have been done any other way?  Probably. But this is what's in practice.

Plus you can certainly live the life of Christ, but if you have no union with him, it's as useful as driving without a seat belt, walk into an infected town without vaccination (best polio vaccine is orally btw), become a professional without taking the board examinations, etc.  Can there be other ways to be safe in driving, to be immune, or to be a professional?  Maybe in the future, man might find a better means, but the men who do so are highly qualified.  Likewise, this is the best way God decided how to do it.  In the second coming, if He changes it, then so be it.  But until then, if I can follow the rules of a society, it's sufficient for me to follow God's covenant, for no one is as qualified as Christ who decreed the Eucharist.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,305


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #46 on: August 07, 2011, 11:35:24 AM »

the nature of many 1st century writings is dubios and questionable... the writings of "pope" Clement... , The Epistle to the Magnesians of Ignatius Theophorus,etc... you want my opinion... the Church forged and invented them, as it forged the didache because of Rome.. Silly Church.. it did not need to do that...

Not all of them were dubious.  Some were called dubious by the Church itself (which makes your accusation unfounded and nonsensical), not for a lack of Orthodoxy, but for the understanding that it wasn't written by these men.  But you don't have to get your sources from pseudo-Clement or pseudo-Ignatius.  The real Clementine and Ignatian writings are still there.  And the Didache carries a date to about the time of the Apostles by the scholars themselves, carrying with it enough credence to have been written either by them, or by some who knew the Apostles directly.  The Didache is credible.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 11:37:17 AM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
lost
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


« Reply #47 on: August 07, 2011, 12:36:20 PM »

the nature of many 1st century writings is dubios and questionable... the writings of "pope" Clement... , The Epistle to the Magnesians of Ignatius Theophorus,etc... you want my opinion... the Church forged and invented them, as it forged the didache because of Rome.. Silly Church.. it did not need to do that...

Not all of them were dubious.  Some were called dubious by the Church itself (which makes your accusation unfounded and nonsensical), not for a lack of Orthodoxy, but for the understanding that it wasn't written by these men.  But you don't have to get your sources from pseudo-Clement or pseudo-Ignatius.  The real Clementine and Ignatian writings are still there.  And the Didache carries a date to about the time of the Apostles by the scholars themselves, carrying with it enough credence to have been written either by them, or by some who knew the Apostles directly.  The Didache is credible.

you forgot pseudo-Barnabas..

the language in the Didache is not the same with the language of the Apostles.. plus.. it is too Churchy... i think i`ve read of the Didache that the Greek added/corrupted something from/in the Didache to incriminate the Latins, in the time of their conflicts...
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,305


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #48 on: August 07, 2011, 01:15:34 PM »

the nature of many 1st century writings is dubios and questionable... the writings of "pope" Clement... , The Epistle to the Magnesians of Ignatius Theophorus,etc... you want my opinion... the Church forged and invented them, as it forged the didache because of Rome.. Silly Church.. it did not need to do that...

Not all of them were dubious.  Some were called dubious by the Church itself (which makes your accusation unfounded and nonsensical), not for a lack of Orthodoxy, but for the understanding that it wasn't written by these men.  But you don't have to get your sources from pseudo-Clement or pseudo-Ignatius.  The real Clementine and Ignatian writings are still there.  And the Didache carries a date to about the time of the Apostles by the scholars themselves, carrying with it enough credence to have been written either by them, or by some who knew the Apostles directly.  The Didache is credible.

you forgot pseudo-Barnabas..

the language in the Didache is not the same with the language of the Apostles.. plus.. it is too Churchy... i think i`ve read of the Didache that the Greek added/corrupted something from/in the Didache to incriminate the Latins, in the time of their conflicts...

Do I really have to name all the pseudos?

Would love to read the sources of that assessment and how it affects the passages onthe Eucharist
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 01:16:51 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
lost
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


« Reply #49 on: August 07, 2011, 01:25:06 PM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,305


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #50 on: August 07, 2011, 01:37:51 PM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: refuse
Posts: 29,313


« Reply #51 on: August 07, 2011, 01:39:41 PM »

the nature of many 1st century writings is dubios and questionable... the writings of "pope" Clement... , The Epistle to the Magnesians of Ignatius Theophorus,etc... you want my opinion... the Church forged and invented them, as it forged the didache because of Rome.. Silly Church.. it did not need to do that...

Can't say I've ever heard that opinion before.  angel
Logged
lost
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


« Reply #52 on: August 07, 2011, 01:59:16 PM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #53 on: August 07, 2011, 02:07:29 PM »

the language in the Didache is not the same with the language of the Apostles.. plus.. it is too Churchy... i think i`ve read of the Didache that the Greek added/corrupted something from/in the Didache to incriminate the Latins, in the time of their conflicts... 

That's an odd opinion, considering:

1. Most scholars I've either read or seen referenced consistently date the Didache in the late 1st or early 2nd century.
2. The fact that the Didache shares language and imagery with Apostolic writing has been drawn out of research on the topic; to wit: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=cTE0FQtrphwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Matthew+and+the+Didache&source=bl&ots=mPIc8kkq4n&sig=nZkwupFYU-WQSozmPQovUebMwzY&hl=en&ei=mbKqTaSaMo6AvgPhuamMCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
lost
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


« Reply #54 on: August 07, 2011, 02:16:48 PM »

the language in the Didache is not the same with the language of the Apostles.. plus.. it is too Churchy... i think i`ve read of the Didache that the Greek added/corrupted something from/in the Didache to incriminate the Latins, in the time of their conflicts... 

That's an odd opinion, considering:

1. Most scholars I've either read or seen referenced consistently date the Didache in the late 1st or early 2nd century.
2. The fact that the Didache shares language and imagery with Apostolic writing has been drawn out of research on the topic; to wit: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=cTE0FQtrphwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Matthew+and+the+Didache&source=bl&ots=mPIc8kkq4n&sig=nZkwupFYU-WQSozmPQovUebMwzY&hl=en&ei=mbKqTaSaMo6AvgPhuamMCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

why don`t you just say what that books said and what you understand from it, since you quote it..
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,305


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #55 on: August 07, 2011, 02:18:25 PM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
lost
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


« Reply #56 on: August 07, 2011, 02:20:33 PM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.
Logged
pasadi97
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 572


« Reply #57 on: August 07, 2011, 02:24:42 PM »

There are reliable documents from history point of view. Many historical documents can be forged. Like for Aristotle or another philosopher there was a document naming him copied in 5th century or so. One document and nobody denied Aristotle existed.

Look the Church has condemned many errors of Protestantism and there are such undeniable documents. Iconoclasm is an error reviewed by protestantism. Many other errors are reviewed and recognizing the Church as true would automatically invalidate Protestantism. So Protestantism had to go great lengths like to say Church in 300 was such and such however the Bible compilled by that Church was valid. Or this document can not be valid since exposes an error of Protestantism and of the thinking of man whatever his name is.

In Eastern orthodoxy being the true belief, there is no need to go heigh ways to cover the truth since all these documents confirm the thinking of the Church. So read the documents of the Early Church like Holy Liturgy of Apostle James and such and find the true Church and don't be caught in Protestantism trap.

Eastern Orthodox Church will not be overcome.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 02:31:14 PM by pasadi97 » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,305


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #58 on: August 07, 2011, 02:27:48 PM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
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 #59 on: August 07, 2011, 02:34:17 PM »

Consistent with the perfection of Orthodox theology, the "change" that occurs at the consecretion during the Divine Liturgy, is referred to theologically, in the Greek language, as "metasiosis," (exact word may be a little off), meaning, a "change of 'essence."  "Transubstantiation" is a Western term.

so technically what what does it mean to eat the body of Christ and drink his blood?
Literally to eat the Body of Christ and drink His Blood.

eating his human body or his divine?or both?
Both. As the Alexandrian/Coptic DL puts it:"His divinity was not parted from His humanity. Not for an instance, nor for the twinkling of an eye."

what is the effect of Eucharist?

As He said: He lives in us, and we in Him.

Does it make anything of Christ active and actual in our soul?

How does medicine, vitamins, nutrients or poison become active in our bodies?

The soul being united to the body makes us alive.  As soon as the soul is not conected to the body, it dies.  Look at the horror St. Paul has at fornication, although it involves the body.  Are you saying the soul isn't affected?  Because just that gnostic view is what St. Paul is condemning.  In converse, St. Paul says the union of the flesh of the married couple is the mystery of Christ's union with the Church His Body.

Is it a divine power that emanates in our soul?
Yes.
Yes.
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
lost
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


« Reply #60 on: August 07, 2011, 02:41:59 PM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/
Logged
lost
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


« Reply #61 on: August 07, 2011, 02:42:46 PM »

Consistent with the perfection of Orthodox theology, the "change" that occurs at the consecretion during the Divine Liturgy, is referred to theologically, in the Greek language, as "metasiosis," (exact word may be a little off), meaning, a "change of 'essence."  "Transubstantiation" is a Western term.

so technically what what does it mean to eat the body of Christ and drink his blood?
Literally to eat the Body of Christ and drink His Blood.

eating his human body or his divine?or both?
Both. As the Alexandrian/Coptic DL puts it:"His divinity was not parted from His humanity. Not for an instance, nor for the twinkling of an eye."

what is the effect of Eucharist?

As He said: He lives in us, and we in Him.

Does it make anything of Christ active and actual in our soul?

How does medicine, vitamins, nutrients or poison become active in our bodies?

The soul being united to the body makes us alive.  As soon as the soul is not conected to the body, it dies.  Look at the horror St. Paul has at fornication, although it involves the body.  Are you saying the soul isn't affected?  Because just that gnostic view is what St. Paul is condemning.  In converse, St. Paul says the union of the flesh of the married couple is the mystery of Christ's union with the Church His Body.

Is it a divine power that emanates in our soul?
Yes.
Yes.

what power?what does it mean to eat and drink Jesus?
Logged
pasadi97
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 572


« Reply #62 on: August 07, 2011, 02:43:11 PM »

Protestantism explained.

At the beginning there was a company named Airbus that produced a valid Airbus manual used to build an Airbus plane that would flie safely. Everybody was happy.

1500 from this company some people used their mind to build their own plane. They called themself Protestants and used their mind to build their own plane they called Protestant Airbus. So at beginning they said that the original manual is false. First thing they were thinking as to why the glasses on the window are neccesary and they tought that these glasses impact people viewing the outside.

So hammer please said Luther, and Calvin and smash....all windows gone. This is how we do protest. The new plane while having the Engine thus being able to fly, would not protect the lifes of passengers so it was almost useless. In religion protestantism  has lost eternal life.

Then many groups were formed starting debates saying engine only, or we believe wings only or some other meanless crap. Some were adding bigger wings saying we are true since it is Wings only and such we have the bigger wings and such.

The Protest and revolutions continued and some extravangt groups took engine out and smashed it.  They were from the Wings only group that took their name seriously.

What can I say more.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 02:53:09 PM by pasadi97 » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,305


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #63 on: August 07, 2011, 02:54:27 PM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/


Well you're out of luck with me.  Don't understand the language.  Maybe you can help by summarizing or translating a quote that verifies your claims.  Or someone else who understands the article may help you.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
lost
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


« Reply #64 on: August 07, 2011, 02:57:48 PM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/


Well you're out of luck with me.  Don't understand the language.  Maybe you can help by summarizing or translating a quote that verifies your claims.  Or someone else who understands the article may help you.

don`t have time to do that, and I`m going to sleep in a few..
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,532


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #65 on: August 07, 2011, 03:38:03 PM »

don`t have time the common courtesy to do that,
I think this fix is more in line with what you should really admit. If you want us to believe something, it's your job to convince us. Don't expect us to do your homework for you.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 03:40:07 PM by PeterTheAleut » 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 #66 on: August 07, 2011, 03:52:10 PM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/


Well you're out of luck with me.  Don't understand the language.  Maybe you can help by summarizing or translating a quote that verifies your claims.  Or someone else who understands the article may help you.
Can't help you: I understand the language (it's Romanian, btw) but it has nothing to do with the Didache or the Eucharist.  It's about the schism of 1054, and mostly deals with events after 800, and doesn't seem to go before the Vth century.
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 #67 on: August 07, 2011, 03:53:37 PM »

Consistent with the perfection of Orthodox theology, the "change" that occurs at the consecretion during the Divine Liturgy, is referred to theologically, in the Greek language, as "metasiosis," (exact word may be a little off), meaning, a "change of 'essence."  "Transubstantiation" is a Western term.

so technically what what does it mean to eat the body of Christ and drink his blood?
Literally to eat the Body of Christ and drink His Blood.

eating his human body or his divine?or both?
Both. As the Alexandrian/Coptic DL puts it:"His divinity was not parted from His humanity. Not for an instance, nor for the twinkling of an eye."

what is the effect of Eucharist?

As He said: He lives in us, and we in Him.

Does it make anything of Christ active and actual in our soul?

How does medicine, vitamins, nutrients or poison become active in our bodies?

The soul being united to the body makes us alive.  As soon as the soul is not conected to the body, it dies.  Look at the horror St. Paul has at fornication, although it involves the body.  Are you saying the soul isn't affected?  Because just that gnostic view is what St. Paul is condemning.  In converse, St. Paul says the union of the flesh of the married couple is the mystery of Christ's union with the Church His Body.

Is it a divine power that emanates in our soul?
Yes.
Yes.

what power?what does it mean to eat and drink Jesus?
God. To eat and drink Jesus.
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
Shiny
Site Supporter
Muted
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #68 on: August 07, 2011, 03:59:11 PM »

Protestantism explained.

At the beginning there was a company named Airbus that produced a valid Airbus manual used to build an Airbus plane that would flie safely. Everybody was happy.

1500 from this company some people used their mind to build their own plane. They called themself Protestants and used their mind to build their own plane they called Protestant Airbus. So at beginning they said that the original manual is false. First thing they were thinking as to why the glasses on the window are neccesary and they tought that these glasses impact people viewing the outside.

So hammer please said Luther, and Calvin and smash....all windows gone. This is how we do protest. The new plane while having the Engine thus being able to fly, would not protect the lifes of passengers so it was almost useless. In religion protestantism  has lost eternal life.

Then many groups were formed starting debates saying engine only, or we believe wings only or some other meanless crap. Some were adding bigger wings saying we are true since it is Wings only and such we have the bigger wings and such.

The Protest and revolutions continued and some extravangt groups took engine out and smashed it.  They were from the Wings only group that took their name seriously.

What can I say more.
I literally laughed hard at this. Thanks.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,402



WWW
« Reply #69 on: August 07, 2011, 05:04:13 PM »

the nature of many 1st century writings is dubios and questionable... the writings of "pope" Clement... , The Epistle to the Magnesians of Ignatius Theophorus,etc... you want my opinion... the Church forged and invented them, as it forged the didache because of Rome.. Silly Church.. it did not need to do that...

Let's not forget those spurious 1st century sources like the Gospels of Matthew, Luke, and John, the Acts of the Apostles, half the writings of St Paul, the epistles of Sts Peter, James, John, and Jude, the book of Revelation, and anything in the Gospels where Our Lord makes reference to His deity or performs some miraculous act.
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #70 on: August 07, 2011, 05:52:07 PM »

Was the Last Supper , the Jewish Passover?

This is not necessarily the case.  Scholars say that they do not expect to ever untangle the question as to whether the Last Supper used leavened or unleavened bread. 


Matthew, Mark and Luke indicate that it was a Passover meal.  John indicates that it was not.

The uncertainty about this emanates from sacred Scripture itself.

you have been circumcised for nothing mate ? Cheesy ... It was NOT the Passover Meal... The Feast of Unleaven was called a Passover... The first day of Unleaven according to the Law of Moses coincided with the Passover Seder... In the Jewish counting of the days, it was the sunset of the 13th of Nissan  and the start of Nissan the 14th, which coincided with Passover... It was still the day of Preparation, when the dough was removed and the lambs were to be slain.The Passover was ment to be eaten on the 14th with bitten earbs and unleaven bread... So the Passover is also the start of the First of Unleaven... Passover and Unleaven were even used as synonims..



I can only repeat.... the timing of the meal in John's Gospel cannot be reconciled with the timing in Matthew, Mark and Luke.

If you have been able to synchronise them, you are a better scholar than hundreds before you.

Let's see your evidences and reasoning.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,532


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #71 on: August 07, 2011, 06:06:05 PM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/
lost,

It appears that you've started a bit of a firestorm with your claim that the Didache is an unreliable forgery. Therefore, to preserve the peace of this thread the moderators have deemed it necessary to ask you to back up your claim with evidence. The above link does not appear to do that, since the linked article mentions nothing of the Didache (at least nothing that I could find). You therefore have until 6:00 p.m. (Eastern U.S. Time) on Wednesday, August 10, to back up your claim with reference to a scholarly source, in English or translated to English, that says exactly that the Didache is a forgery or is suspected to be a forgery. Since I may have missed the above blog post's reference to the Didache, I will also accept you pointing out exactly how that blog post supports your claim. Either way, failure to either support your claim with evidence or retract it within the three days you've been given will result in further disciplinary action against you.

- PeterTheAleut
Moderator
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 06:07:49 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,409


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #72 on: August 07, 2011, 07:05:48 PM »

the language in the Didache is not the same with the language of the Apostles.. plus.. it is too Churchy... i think i`ve read of the Didache that the Greek added/corrupted something from/in the Didache to incriminate the Latins, in the time of their conflicts...

As noted above, scholars date the Didache to the second half of the first century, or, at the latest, to the first half of the second century.  One of the reasons for this early date are the Eucharistic prayers, which are different from what started to be used soon after that period.  The Eucharistic prayers are Jewish in character and attest to the Didache being composed and used by very early Jewish Christians.

If the Greeks had "added/corrupted" the Didache's text, the Eucharistic prayers would be nothing like they are.
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 #73 on: August 07, 2011, 07:25:20 PM »

Was the Last Supper , the Jewish Passover?

This is not necessarily the case.  Scholars say that they do not expect to ever untangle the question as to whether the Last Supper used leavened or unleavened bread. 


Matthew, Mark and Luke indicate that it was a Passover meal.  John indicates that it was not.

The uncertainty about this emanates from sacred Scripture itself.

you have been circumcised for nothing mate ? Cheesy ... It was NOT the Passover Meal... The Feast of Unleaven was called a Passover... The first day of Unleaven according to the Law of Moses coincided with the Passover Seder... In the Jewish counting of the days, it was the sunset of the 13th of Nissan  and the start of Nissan the 14th, which coincided with Passover... It was still the day of Preparation, when the dough was removed and the lambs were to be slain.The Passover was ment to be eaten on the 14th with bitten earbs and unleaven bread... So the Passover is also the start of the First of Unleaven... Passover and Unleaven were even used as synonims..



I can only repeat.... the timing of the meal in John's Gospel cannot be reconciled with the timing in Matthew, Mark and Luke.

If you have been able to synchronise them, you are a better scholar than hundreds before you.

Let's see your evidences and reasoning.
At the risk of hubris, I went through this, an excerpt:
So, again, why is the discussion of the "lump" there, not to mention the reasoning that we "purge out the old leaven, that [we] may be a new lump"?:
should indicate the virtual impossibility of Christ using leavened bread, even if this was the night before the day the Passover/Unleavened Bread festival began. In preparing for the Passover all leaven, and all things leavened, would have been removed from all places of residence and meal preparations (save for the small bit retained for the final ceremonial cleansing to kick off the festival proper).
That first Eucharist was that last small bit, the Saved Remnaint.[/quote]
And that removal of the old leaven happened on the 14th of Nisan, the day the Passover was sacrificed as St. John (and St. Paul) tells us. If Christ was sacrificed on the 15th, as is claimed the Synoptics say, He would not be our Passover sacrificed for us. Which leads to your third problem:
3) St. Paul agrees with St. John (and the rest of the Orthodox) that Christ was sacrificed before the Seder, as Christ, as our Passover was sacrificed for us, but to be our Passover, He would have had to have been sacrificed as the Law an type called for:Nisan 14, NOT the 15th, the first day of unleavened bread. The only "need to mishandle or wrest it to fit with our presuppositions" comes with fitting the Gospel account with the typology Moses laid down with the commandments of the celebration of the sacrifice of the Passover (the day beforeNisan 15) and the Unleavened Bread (Nisan 15) and First Fruits and the count down to Pentacost and the reception of the Covenant (Nisan 16).
Such is the Messianic application you ask for:

Quote
Besides, a cursory familiarity with Jewish festival customs
As they are celebrated now: it never ceases to amaze me how Protestants, who won't accept the Tradition of the Church, take the traditions that the present days Jews preserve from the pharisees as the Gospel truth, whether it be their preference of the late Masoretic text (fixed Nearly a millenium after the Church's Septuagint), or the preference of the Talmud's interpretation over the Fathers of the Church.[/quote]
Exactly.  
Well, can either of you prove that the things to which I referred have no ancient validation nor Messianic application?
Christ, Our Passover, is the Bread of Life, not the Bread of Affliction.  The Passover lamb was sacrificed before the first day of the feast of the Unleavened Bread, on 14th Nisan.  Scripture and all ancient authorities agree:and, according to the Synoptics, they didn't taste lamb at the supper, so it definitely didn't taste like a seder.  There were Quartodecimentarism, but no Quintodecimeniansim [Polycrates of Ephesus c. 190]:
Quote
1...the bishops of Asia, led by Polycrates, decided to hold to the old custom handed down to them.  He himself, in a letter which he addressed to Victor and the church of Rome, set forth in the following words the tradition which had come down to him: 2. “We observe the exact day; neither adding, nor taking away. For in Asia also great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on the day of the Lord’s coming, when he shall come with glory from heaven, and shall seek out all the saints. Among these are Philip, one of the twelve apostles, who fell asleep in Hierapolis; and his two aged virgin daughters, and another daughter, who lived in the Holy Spirit and now rests at Ephesus; and, moreover, John, who was both a witness and a teacher, who reclined upon the bosom of the Lord, and, being a priest, wore the sacerdotal plate. 3. He fell asleep at Ephesus.  4. And Polycarp in Smyrna, who was a bishop and martyr;....6. All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith.  And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, do according to the tradition of my relatives, some of whom I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops; and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people put away the leaven.  7. I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord, and have met with the brethren throughout the world, and have gone through every Holy Scripture, am not affrighted by terrifying words. For those greater than I have said ‘We ought to obey God rather than man.’”
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.x.xxv.html
Such is that the Paschal New Moon (i.e. the 14th of Nisan) still determines Pascha.
This problem that people make for the Synoptics (Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7, cf. Mat. 26:2, 17) does not explain why the Synoptics identify the first day of Unleavened Bread as the day on which they "killed the Passover."  The Passover was sacrifed, as the OT shows, on the 14th Nisan "between the two sunsets," the Feast of Unleavenend Bread occured on the 15th.  The priests, St. Matthew (26:2, 3-5) and St. Mark specifically tells us (14:1-2), did not arrest, try and kill Christ during the Feast of Unleavened Bread, but before. St. Luke tells us (22:1) the Feast of Unleavened Bread was called the Passover; Mark 14:1 tells us the Passover and the [Feast] of Unleavened Bread was coming, conflated in English but distinguished in Greek. If the Passover sacrifice was muddled, upon which your interpretation depends,  with the Feast of the Unleavened Bread, eating the seder (and hence the passover sacrifice) on the second day of the week of the Unleavened and sacrificing the lamb a day late according to Moses, then the the Gospel is breaking the Pentateuch (not to mention St. John) besides "the text itself [being] clear, this was" NOT "a passover meal...The Bible clearly says it was" NOT "a passover celebration that Jesus had with his disciples on the eve of his crucifixion." At least one not according to Moses, who stated in words which cannot be broken and do not pass away, that the Passover was sacrificed on the 14 and the feast of Unleavened on the 15 of Nisan.

"No, God is not the author of confusion, and we need not convolute the matter further."  No Christian ever attached any importance to the 15th of Nisan, so the Synoptics must be read in the light of St. John the Theologian.  ALL messianic prophecies hinge on Christ being sacrifice on the 14th of Nisan. Cf. the typology of Joshua (Greek Jesus) entering the Promised Land after passing through the waters of Jordan (where Christ was baptized) (Jos. 4:18-19): this was the 10th of Nisan, when the Passover lambs were chosen, and then sacrificed (5:10) on the 14th, and on the 15th they ate the old wheat of the land unleavened, and rested (before going to take possession of the Land) as it was a double Sabbath-both for the Week and the Passover Festival-just as the Lord rested on the last day of the Old Creation and kept the Sabbath in the tomb, and the next day on the 16th they ate of the first fruits of the promised land (Lev. 23:10), a type of the Resurrection-the Eighth Day of Creation and the First Day of the New Creation-and the manna ceased to fall (5:12).  They were home.  And they started counting the Omer, which was the countdown to Pentacost, when the Law came down, both Old and New.
Btw, the Jews stress that Israel was freed on Passover only so that they could receive the Commandments on Pentacost. Hmmm. Sounds familiar....purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump....They also read Ruth on that day, the account of the founding of the House of David.  How's that for Messianic? They also seem to answer your further questioning:
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
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #74 on: August 07, 2011, 07:42:06 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!



The problem is there is almoust zero evidence of the sacramental essence of the Eucharist in the 1st century.I know of none.. In another site some Orthodox told me that the Lord's Supper was a meal of love, where everybody brought food and drink and ate them together.

Again, that is simply not true.  I don't not have the available research at this moment, and surely in time just because of this thread I will make the compilation of relevant patristics, but be sure that there is a plethora of evidence from multiple primary sources in the 1st and 2nd century to describe both the Liturgical process and also the theological implications of the Holy Communion.  Holy Communion is by no means  later addition to the Church, it has been the foundation of Christianity since that very first Holy Thursday of Its' institution.  Further, it has always been liturgical, surely I would even dare to say that when Our Lord first broke that Bread and poured that Wine, He also did it liturgically as do we continue to this day.  Again, to suggest otherwise is really an anachronism applying more than likely current Protestant thinking onto the early Church, when there is no need, Orthodox is a continuity not a throwback or a revival.  The way we do it is the way we did it, which is why we chant, "As it was then, is now, and shall be forever unto the endless Ages of all Ages" at Divine Liturgy.

I would think it a bit irreverent to suppose that the Holy Communion was merely a specially commemorative meal shared by the Church which was later institutionalized Sacramentally, that is contrary to many other aspects of the Apostolic Succession and the Holy Tradition.  It is better to assume things are the same as ever and will be the same as ever, otherwise fundamental flaws arise in the theology underlying the Sacramentality of the Mysteries themselves. 

Quote
The Eucharistic prayers are Jewish in character and attest to the Didache being composed and used by very early Jewish Christians.
Yes, we discussed this before, this is the precise evidence to the Liturgical aspects of the 1st century Church, because it was an evolution of the preceding Jewish liturgies which for a thousand years previously had formalized, chanted, and serious rather than casual, recited, and loosely organized like some of the more Protestant conceptions of the early Church.  We know from plenty of evidence that the early Church was as strictly organized, institutional, and Sacramental as it is today and always has been in perpetuity.  If folks do not trust our own internal evidence, that is really a matter of their own skepticism, but I can tell you not just as a believer but as a teacher trained in profession/academic historical research, that our primary source material is reliable, including the Didache.

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #75 on: August 07, 2011, 07:48:42 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Big surprise, the Catholics made this evidence issue easy for us Wink
Quote
ST. CLEMENT OF ROME (c. 80 A.D.)

Our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who blamelessly and holily have OFFERED ITS SACRIFICES [or offered the gifts, referring to the Eucharist]. (Letter to Corinthians 44:4)

========================================================================

ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH (c. 110 A.D.)

I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the Bread of God, WHICH IS THE FLESH OF JESUS CHRIST, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I DESIRE HIS BLOOD, which is love incorruptible. (Letter to Romans 7:3)

Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: FOR THERE IS ONE FLESH OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, and one cup IN THE UNION OF HIS BLOOD; one ALTAR, as there is one bishop with the presbytery... (Letter to Philadelphians 4:1)

They [i.e. the Gnostics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that THE EUCHARIST IS THE FLESH OF OUR SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. (Letter to Smyrn 7:1)

========================================================================

ST. JUSTIN THE MARTYR (c. 100 - 165 A.D.)

We call this food Eucharist; and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [Baptism], and is thereby living as Christ has enjoined.

For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, AND BY THE CHANGE OF WHICH our blood and flesh is nourished, IS BOTH THE FLESH AND THE BLOOD OF THAT INCARNATED JESUS. (First Apology 66)

Moreover, as I said before, concerning the sacrifices which you at that time offered, God speaks through Malachi [1:10-12]...It is of the SACRIFICES OFFERED TO HIM IN EVERY PLACE BY US, the Gentiles, that is, OF THE BREAD OF THE EUCHARIST AND LIKEWISE OF THE CUP OF THE EUCHARIST, that He speaks at that time; and He says that we glorify His name, while you profane it. (Dialogue with Trypho 41)

========================================================================

DIDACHE or TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES (c. 140 A.D.)

On the Lord's Day of the Lord gather together, break bread and give thanks, after confessing your transgressions SO THAT YOUR SACRIFICE MAY BE PURE. Let no one who has a quarrel with his neighbor join you until he is reconciled by the Lord: "In every place and time let there be OFFERED TO ME A CLEAN SACRIFICE. For I am a Great King," says the Lord, "and My name is wonderful among the Gentiles." (14:1-2)

========================================================================

ST. IRENAEUS (c. 140 - 202 A.D.)

...He took from among creation that which is bread, and gave thanks, saying, "THIS IS MY BODY." The cup likewise, which is from among the creation to which we belong, HE CONFESSED TO BE HIS BLOOD.

He taught THE NEW SACRIFICE OF THE NEW COVENANT, of which Malachi, one of the twelve prophets, had signified beforehand: [quotes Mal 1:10-11]. By these words He makes it plain that the former people will cease to make offerings to God; BUT THAT IN EVERY PLACE SACRIFICE WILL BE OFFERED TO HIM, and indeed, a pure one; for His name is glorified among the Gentiles. (Against Heresies 4:17:5)

But what consistency is there in those who hold that the bread over which thanks have been given IS THE BODY OF THEIR LORD, and the cup HIS BLOOD, if they do not acknowledge that He is the Son of the Creator... How can they say that the flesh which has been nourished BY THE BODY OF THE LORD AND BY HIS BLOOD gives way to corruption and does not partake of life? ...For as the bread from the earth, receiving the invocation of God, IS NO LONGER COMMON BREAD BUT THE EUCHARIST, consisting of two elements, earthly and heavenly... (Against Heresies 4:18:4-5)

If the BODY be not saved, then, in fact, neither did the Lord redeem us with His BLOOD; and neither is the cup of the EUCHARIST THE PARTAKING OF HIS BLOOD nor is the bread which we break THE PARTAKING OF HIS BODY...He has declared the cup, a part of creation, TO BE HIS OWN BLOOD, from which He causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, HE HAS ESTABLISHED AS HIS OWN BODY, from which He gives increase to our bodies.

When, therefore, the mixed cup and the baked bread receives the Word of God and BECOMES THE EUCHARIST, THE BODY OF CHRIST, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, WHICH IS ETERNAL LIFE -- flesh which is nourished BY THE BODY AND BLOOD OF THE LORD...receiving the Word of God, BECOMES THE EUCHARIST, WHICH IS THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST... (Against Heresies 5:2:2-3)

========================================================================

TERTULLIAN (c. 155 - 250 A.D.)

Likewise, in regard to days of fast, many do not think they should be present at the SACRIFICIAL prayers, because their fast would be broken if they were to receive THE BODY OF THE LORD...THE BODY OF THE LORD HAVING BEEN RECEIVED AND RESERVED, each point is secured: both the participation IN THE SACRIFICE... (Prayer 19:1)

The flesh feeds on THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST, so that the SOUL TOO may fatten on God. (Resurrection of the Dead 8:3)

The Sacrament of the Eucharist, which the Lord commanded to be taken at meal times and by all, we take even before daybreak in congregations... WE OFFER SACRIFICES FOR THE DEAD on their birthday anniversaries.... We take anxious care lest something of our Cup or Bread should fall upon the ground... (The Crown 3:3-4)

A woman, after the death of her husband, is bound not less firmly but even more so, not to marry another husband...Indeed, she prays for his soul and asks that he may, while waiting, find rest; and that he may share in the first resurrection. And each year, on the anniversary of his death, SHE OFFERS THE SACRIFICE. (Monogamy 10:1,4)

========================================================================

ORIGEN (c. 185 - 254 A.D.)

We give thanks to the Creator of all, and, along with thanksgiving and prayer for the blessings we have received, we also eat the bread presented to us; and this bread BECOMES BY PRAYER A SACRED BODY, which sanctifies those who sincerely partake of it. (Against Celsus 8:33)

You see how the ALTARS are no longer sprinkled with the blood of oxen, but consecrated BY THE PRECIOUS BLOOD OF CHRIST. (Homilies on Josue 2:1)

But if that text (Lev 24:5-9) is taken to refer to the greatness of what is mystically symbolized, then there is a 'commemoration' which has an EFFECT OF GREAT PROPITIATORY VALUE. If you apply it to that 'Bread which came down from heaven and gives life to the world,' that shewbread which 'God has offered to us as a means of reconciliation, in virtue of faith, ransoming us with his blood,' and if you look to that commemoration of which the Lord says, 'Do this in commemoration of me,' then you will find that this is the unique commemoration WHICH MAKES GOD PROPITIOUS TO MEN. (Homilies on Leviticus 9)

You are accustomed to take part in the divine mysteries, so you know how, when you have received THE BODY OF THE LORD, you reverently exercise every care lest a particle of it fall, and lest anything of the consecrated gift perish....how is it that you think neglecting the word of God a lesser crime than neglecting HIS BODY? (Homilies on Exodus 13:3)

...now, however, in full view, there is the true food, THE FLESH OF THE WORD OF GOD, as He Himself says: "MY FLESH IS TRULY FOOD, AND MY BLOOD IS TRULY DRINK." (Homilies on Numbers 7:2)

========================================================================

ST. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA (c. 150 - 216 A.D.)

Calling her children about her, she [the Church] nourishes them with holy milk, that is, with the Infant Word...The Word is everything to a child: both Father and Mother, both Instructor and Nurse. "EAT MY FLESH," He says, "AND DRINK MY BLOOD." The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutriments. HE DELIVERS OVER HIS FLESH, AND POURS OUT HIS BLOOD; and nothing is lacking for the growth of His children. O incredible mystery! (Instructor of Children 1:6:42,1,3)

========================================================================

ST. CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE (c. 200 - 258 A.D.)

And we ask that this Bread be given us daily, so that we who are in Christ and daily receive THE EUCHARIST AS THE FOOD OF SALVATION, may not, by falling into some more grievous sin and then in abstaining from communicating, be withheld from the heavenly Bread, and be separated from Christ's Body...

He Himself warns us, saying, "UNLESS YOU EAT THE FLESH OF THE SON OF MAN AND DRINK HIS BLOOD, YOU SHALL NOT HAVE LIFE IN YOU." Therefore do we ask that our Bread, WHICH IS CHRIST, be given to us daily, so that we who abide and live in Christ may not withdraw from His sanctification and from His Body. (The Lord's Prayer 18)

Also in the priest Melchisedech we see THE SACRAMENT OF THE SACRIFICE OF THE LORD prefigured...The order certainly is that which comes from his [Mel's] sacrifice and which comes down from it: because Mel was a priest of the Most High God; because he offered bread; and because he blessed Abraham. And who is more a priest of the Most High God than our Lord Jesus Christ, who, WHEN HE OFFERED SACRIFICE TO GOD THE FATHER, OFFERED THE VERY SAME WHICH MELCHISEDECH HAD OFFERED, NAMELY BREAD AND WINE, WHICH IS IN FACT HIS BODY AND BLOOD! (Letters 63:4)

If Christ Jesus, our Lord and God, is Himself the High Priest of God the Father; AND IF HE OFFERED HIMSELF AS A SACRIFICE TO THE FATHER; AND IF HE COMMANDED THAT THIS BE DONE IN COMMEMORATION OF HIMSELF -- then certainly the priest, who imitates that which Christ did, TRULY FUNCTIONS IN PLACE OF CHRIST. (Letters 63:14)
http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/num8.htm
Quote
St. Clement was the third successor of Peter as Bishop of Rome; otherwise known as the third Pope.

    "Since then these things are manifest to us, and we have looked into the depths of the divine knowledge, we ought to do in order all things which the Master commanded us to perform at appointed times. He commanded us to celebrate sacrifices and services, and that it should not be thoughtlessly or disorderly, but at fixed times and hours. He has Himself fixed by His supreme will the places and persons whom He desires for these celebrations, in order that all things may be done piously according to His good pleasure, and be acceptable to His will. So then those who offer their oblations at the appointed seasons are acceptable and blessed, but they follow the laws of the Master and do not sin. For to the high priest his proper ministrations are allotted, and to the priests the proper place has been appointed, and on Levites their proper services have been imposed. The layman is bound by the ordinances for the laity."

Source: St. Clement, bishop of Rome, 80 A.D., to the Corinthians

    "Our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who blamelessly and holily have offered its Sacrifices."

    Source: Letter to the Corinthians, [44,4]

ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH  (Alt)

St. Ignatius became the third bishop of Antioch, succeeding St. Evodius, who was the immediate successor of St. Peter. He heard St. John preach when he was a boy and knew St. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna. Seven of his letters written to various Christian communities have been preserved. Eventually, he received the martyr's crown as he was thrown to wild beasts in the arena.

    "Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead."

    "Letter to the Smyrnaeans", paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.

    "Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ."

    -"Letter to the Ephesians", paragraph 20, c. 80-110 A.D.

    "I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed."

    -"Letter to the Romans", paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D.

    "Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons."

    -Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR  (Alt)

St. Justin Martyr was born a pagan but converted to Christianity after studying philosophy. He was a prolific writer and many Church scholars consider him the greatest apologist or defender of the faith from the 2nd century. He was beheaded with six of his companions some time between 163 and 167 A.D.

    "This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God's Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus."

    "First Apology", Ch. 66, inter A.D. 148-155.

    "God has therefore announced in advance that all the sacrifices offered in His name, which Jesus Christ offered, that is, in the Eucharist of the Bread and of the Chalice, which are offered by us Christians in every part of the world, are pleasing to Him."

    "Dialogue with Trypho", Ch. 117, circa 130-160 A.D.

    Moreover, as I said before, concerning the sacrifices which you at that time offered, God speaks through Malachias, one of the twelve, as follows: 'I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices from your hands; for from the rising of the sun until its setting, my name has been glorified among the gentiles; and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a clean offering: for great is my name among the gentiles, says the Lord; but you profane it.' It is of the sacrifices offered to Him in every place by us, the gentiles, that is, of the Bread of the Eucharist and likewise of the cup of the Eucharist, that He speaks at that time; and He says that we glorify His name, while you profane it."

    -"Dialogue with Trypho", [41: 8-10]

ST. IRENAEUS OF LYONS  (Alt)

St. Irenaeus succeeded St. Pothinus to become the second bishop of Lyons in 177 A.D. Earlier in his life he studied under St. Polycarp. Considered, one of the greatest theologians of the 2nd century, St. Irenaeus is best known for refuting the Gnostic heresies.

    [Christ] has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own Blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own Body, from which he gives increase to our bodies."

    Source: St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, 180 A.D.:

    "So then, if the mixed cup and the manufactured bread receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, that is to say, the Blood and Body of Christ, which fortify and build up the substance of our flesh, how can these people claim that the flesh is incapable of receiving God's gift of eternal life, when it is nourished by Christ's Blood and Body and is His member? As the blessed apostle says in his letter to the Ephesians, 'For we are members of His Body, of His flesh and of His bones' (Eph. 5:30). He is not talking about some kind of 'spiritual' and 'invisible' man, 'for a spirit does not have flesh an bones' (Lk. 24:39). No, he is talking of the organism possessed by a real human being, composed of flesh and nerves and bones. It is this which is nourished by the cup which is His Blood, and is fortified by the bread which is His Body. The stem of the vine takes root in the earth and eventually bears fruit, and 'the grain of wheat falls into the earth' (Jn. 12:24), dissolves, rises again, multiplied by the all-containing Spirit of God, and finally after skilled processing, is put to human use. These two then receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, which is the Body and Blood of Christ."

    -"Five Books on the Unmasking and Refutation of the Falsely

    Named Gnosis". Book 5:2, 2-3, circa 180 A.D. "For just as the bread which comes from the earth, having received the invocation of God, is no longer ordinary bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly, so our bodies, having received the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, because they have the hope of the resurrection."

    -"Five Books on the Unmasking and Refutation of the Falsely named Gnosis". Book 4:18 4-5, circa 180 A.D.

ST. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA  (Alt)

St. Clement of Alexandria studied under Pantaenus. He later succeeded him as the director of the school of catechumens in Alexandria, Egypt around the year 200 A.D.,

    "The Blood of the Lord, indeed, is twofold. There is His corporeal Blood, by which we are redeemed from corruption; and His spiritual Blood, that with which we are anointed. That is to say, to drink the Blood of Jesus is to share in His immortality. The strength of the Word is the Spirit just as the blood is the strength of the body. Similarly, as wine is blended with water, so is the Spirit with man. The one, the Watered Wine, nourishes in faith, while the other, the Spirit, leads us on to immortality. The union of both, however, - of the drink and of the Word, - is called the Eucharist, a praiseworthy and excellent gift. Those who partake of it in faith are sanctified in body and in soul. By the will of the Father, the divine mixture, man, is mystically united to the Spirit and to the Word.",

    -"The Instructor of the Children". [2,2,19,4] ante 202 A.D.,

    "The Word is everything to a child: both Father and Mother, both Instructor and Nurse. 'Eat My Flesh,' He says, 'and drink My Blood.' The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients. He delivers over His Flesh, and pours out His Blood; and nothing is lacking for the growth of His children. O incredible mystery!",

    -"The Instructor of the Children" [1,6,41,3] ante 202 A.D.. ,

ST. CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE  (Alt)

St. Cyprian of Carthage converted from paganism to Christianity around the year 246 A.D. Soon afterwards, he aspired to the priesthood and eventually was ordained Bishop of Carthage. He was beheaded for his Faith in the year 258 A.D., thus he was the first African bishop to have been martyred.,

    "So too the the sacred meaning of the Pasch lies essentially in the fact, laid down in Exodus, that the lamb - slain as a type of Christ - should be eaten in one single home. God says the words: 'In one house shall it be eaten, ye shall not cast its flesh outside.' The flesh of Christ and the Lord's sacred body cannot be cast outside, nor have believers any other home but the one Church.",

    -"The Unity of the Catholic Church". Ch.8, circa 249-258 A.D.,

Description of an event in which an infant was taken to a pagan sacrifice and then the mother recovered it and brought it to Mass.

    "Listen to what happened in my presence, before my very eyes. There was a baby girl, whose parents had fled and had, in their fear, rather improvidently lift it in the charge of its nurse. The nurse took the helpless child to the magistrates. There, before the idol where the crowds were flocking, as it was too young to eat the flesh, they gave it some bread dipped in what was left of the wine offered by those who had already doomed themselves. Later, the mother recovered her child. But the girl could not reveal or tell the wicked thing that had been done, any more than she had been able to understand or ward it off before. Thus, when the mother brought her in with her while we were offering the Sacrifice, it was through ignorance that this mischance occurred. But the infant, in the midst of the faithful, resenting the prayer and the offering we were making, began to cry convulsively, struggling and tossing in a veritable brain-storm, and for all its tender age and simplicity of soul, was confessing, as if under torture, in every way it could, its consciousness of the misdeed. Moreover, when the sacred rites were completed and the deacon began ministering to those present, when its turn came to receive, it turned its little head away as if sensing the divine presence, it closed its mouth, held its lips tight, and refused to drink from the chalice. The deacon persisted and, in spite of its opposition, poured in some of the consecrated chalice. There followed choking and vomiting. The Eucharist could not remain in a body or mouth that was defiled; the drink which had been sanctified by Our Lord's blood returned from the polluted stomach. So great is the power of the Lord, and so great His majesty!",

    -"The Lapsed" Ch. 25, circa 249-258 A.D.,

    "The priest who imitates that which Christ did, truly takes the place of Christ, and offers there in the Church a true and perfect sacrifice to God the Father.",

    Source: St. Cyprian wrote to the Ephesians circa 258 A.D:,

    "There was a woman too who with impure hands tried to open the locket in which she was keeping Our Lord's holy body, but fire flared up from it and she was too terrified to touch it. And a man who, in spite of his sin, also presumed secretly to join the rest in receiving sacrifice offered by the bishop, was unable to eat or even handle Our Lord's sacred body; when he opened his hands, he found he was holding nothing but ashes. By this one example it was made manifest that Our Lord removes Himself from one who denies Him, and that what is received brings no blessing to the unworthy, since the Holy One has fled and the saving grace is turned to ashes.",

    -"The Lapsed" Ch. 26, circa 249-258 A.D.,

    As the prayer proceeds, we ask and say: 'Give us this day our daily bread.' This can be understood both spiritually and simply, because either understanding is of profit in divine usefulness for salvation. For Christ is the bread of life and the bread here is of all, but is ours. And as we say 'Our Father,' because He is the Father of those who understand and believe, so too we say 'our Bread,' because Christ is the bread of those of us who attain to His body. Moreover, we ask that this bread be given daily, lest we, who are in Christ and receive the Eucharist daily as food of salvation, with the intervention of some more grievous sin, while we are shut off and as non-communicants are kept from the heavenly bread, be separated from the body of Christ as He Himself declares, saying: 'I am the bread of life which came down from heaven. If any man eat of my bread he shall live forever. Moreover, the bread that I shall give is my flesh for the life of the world.' Since then He says that, if anyone eats of His bread, he lives forever, as it is manifest that they live who attain to His body and receive the Eucharist by right of communion, so on the other hand we must fear and pray lest anyone, while he is cut off and separated from the body of Christ, remain apart from salvation, as He Himself threatens, saying: 'Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you.' And so we petition that our bread, that is Christ, be given us daily, so that we, who abide and live in Christ, may not withdraw from His sanctification and body.",

    Source: St. Cyprian of Carthage, the Lord's Prayer, 252 A.D., chapter 18:,

APHRAATES THE PERSIAN SAGE

Not much biographical information has been left about Aphraates. It is known that he was one of the Fathers of the Syrian Church. It is speculated that he was made bishop late in his life.,

He is thought to have been born ca. 280 A.D. and to have died ca. 345 A.D.,

    "But the Lord was not yet arrested. After having spoken thus, the Lord rose up from the place where He had made the Passover and had given His Body as food and His Blood as drink, and He went with His disciples to the place where He was to be arrested. But he ate of His own Body and drank of His own Blood, while He was pondering on the dead. With His own hands the Lord presented His own Body to be eaten, and before he was crucified He gave His blood as drink; and He was taken at night on the fourteenth, and was judged until the sixth hour; and at the sixth hour they condemned Him and raised Him on the cross.",

    - "Treatises" [12,6] inter 336-345 A.D.,

SERAPION  (Alt)

    "'Holy, holy, holy Lord Sabaoth, heaven and earth is full of Your glory.' Heaven is full, and full is the earth with your magnificent glory, Lord of Virtues. Full also is this Sacrifice, with your strength and your communion; for to You we offer this living Sacrifice, this unbloody oblation.,

    To you we offer this bread, the likeness of the Body of the Only-begotten. This bread is the likeness of His holy Body because the Lord Jesus Christ, on the night on which He was betrayed, took bread and broke and gave to His disciples, saying, 'Take and eat, this is My Body, which is being broken for you, unto the remission of sins.' On this account too do we offer the Bread, to bring ourselves into the likeness of His death; and we pray: Reconcile us all, O God of truth, and be gracious to us. And just as this Bread was scattered over the mountains and when collected was made one, so too gather Your holy Church from every nation and every country and every city and village and house and make it one living Catholic Church.,

    We offer also the cup, the likeness of His Blood, because the Lord Jesus Christ took the cup after He had eaten, and He said to His disciples, 'Take, drink, this is the new covenant, which is My Blood which is being poured out for you unto the remission of sins.' For this reason too we offer the chalice, to benefit ourselves by the likeness of His Blood. O God of truth, may Your Holy Logos come upon this Bread, that the Bread may become the Body of the Logos, and on this Cup, that the Cup may become the Blood of the Truth. And make all who communicate receive the remedy of life, to cure every illness and to strengthen every progress and virtue; not unto condemnation, O God of truth, nor unto disgrace and reproach!,

    For we invoke You, the Increate, through Your Only-begotten in the Holy Spirit. Be merciful to this people, sent for the destruction of evil and for the security of Your Church. We beseech You also on behalf of all the departed, of whom also this is the commemoration: - after the mentioning of their names: - Sanctify these souls, for You know them all; sanctify all who have fallen asleep in the Lord and count them among the ranks of Your saints and give them a place and abode in your kingdom. Accept also the thanksgiving of Your people and bless those who offer the oblations and the Thanksgivings, and bestow health and integrity and festivity and every progress of soul and body on the whole of this Your people through your Only-begotten Jesus Christ in the Holy Spirit, as it was and is and will be in generations of generations and unto the whole expanse of the ages of ages. Amen.",

    -"The Sacramentary of Serapion, Prayer of the Eucharistic Sacrifice" [13],

ST. EPHRAIM  (Alt)

St. Ephraim was one of the great authors of the Syrian Church. Because of his beautiful writings, he is sometimes referred to as the 'lyre of the Holy Spirit'. He studied under James, Bishop of Nisbis. In 338 A.D. he aspired to the diaconate and remained a deacon for the remainder of his life.,

    "Our Lord Jesus took in His hands what in the beginning was only bread; and He blessed it, and signed it, and made it holy in the name of the Father and in the name of the Spirit; and He broke it and in His gracious kindness He distributed it to all His disciples one by one. He called the bread His living Body, and did Himself fill it with Himself and the Spirit.,

    And extending His hand, He gave them the Bread which His right hand had made holy: 'Take, all of you eat of this; which My word has made holy. Do not now regard as bread that which I have given you; but take, eat this Bread, and do not scatter the crumbs; for what I have called My Body, that it is indeed. One particle from its crumbs is able to sanctify thousands and thousands, and is sufficient to afford life to those who eat of it. Take, eat, entertaining no doubt of faith, because this is My Body, and whoever eats it in belief eats in it Fire and Spirit. But if any doubter eat of it, for him it will be only bread. And whoever eats in belief the Bread made holy in My name, if he be pure, he will be preserved in his purity; and if he be a sinner, he will be forgiven.' But if anyone despise it or reject it or treat it with ignominy, it may be taken as certainty that he treats with ignominy the Son, who called it and actually made it to be His Body.",

    -"Homilies" 4,4 ca.. 350 A.D.,

    "After the disciples had eaten the new and holy Bread, and when they understood by faith that they had eaten of Christ's body, Christ went on to explain and to give them the whole Sacrament. He took and mixed a cup of wine. The He blessed it, and signed it, and made it holy, declaring that it was His own Blood, which was about to be poured out….Christ commanded them to drink, and He explained to them that the cup which they were drinking was His own Blood: 'This is truly My Blood, which is shed for all of you. Take, all of you, drink of this, because it is a new covenant in My Blood, As you have seen Me do, do you also in My memory. Whenever you are gathered together in My name in Churches everywhere, do what I have done, in memory of Me. Eat My Body, and drink My Blood, a covenant new and old.",

    -"Homilies" 4,6 ca. 350 A.D.,

    "'And your floors shall be filled with wheat, and the presses shall overflow equally with wine and oil.' … This has been fulfilled mystically by Christ, who gave to the people whom He had redeemed, that is, to His Church, wheat and wine and oil in a mystic manner. For the wheat is the mystery of His sacred Body; and the wine His saving Blood; and again, the oil is the sweet unguent with which those who are baptized are signed, being clothed in the armaments of the Holy Spirit.",

    -"On Joel 2:24", Commentaries on Sacred Scripture, Vol. 2 p. 252 of the Assemani edition.

ST. ATHANASIUS  (Alt)

St. Athanasius was born in Alexandria ca. 295 A.D. He was ordained a deacon in 319 A.D. He accompanied his bishop, Alexander, to the Council of Nicaea, where he served as his secretary. Eventually he succeeded Alexander as Bishop of Alexandria. He is most known for defending Nicene doctrine against Arian disputes.,

    "'The great Athanasius in his sermon to the newly baptized says this:' You shall see the Levites bringing loaves and a cup of wine, and placing them on the table. So long as the prayers of supplication and entreaties have not been made, there is only bread and wine. But after the great and wonderful prayers have been completed, then the bread is become the Body, and the wine the Blood, of our Lord Jesus Christ. 'And again:' Let us approach the celebration of the mysteries. This bread and this wine, so long as the prayers and supplications have not taken place, remain simply what they are. But after the great prayers and holy supplications have been sent forth, the Word comes down into the bread and wine - and thus His Body is confected.",

    -"Sermon to the Newly Baptized" ante 373 A.D.,

ST. CYRIL OF JERUSALEM  (Alt)

St. Cyril served as Bishop of Jerusalem in the years 348-378 A.D.,

    "`I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread, etc. [1 Cor. 11:23]'. This teaching of the Blessed Paul is alone sufficient to give you a full assurance concerning those Divine Mysteries, which when ye are vouchsafed, ye are of (the same body) [Eph 3:6] and blood with Christ. For he has just distinctly said, (That our Lord Jesus Christ the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread, and when He had given thanks He brake it, and said, Take, eat, this is My Body: and having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, Take, drink, this is My Blood.) [1 Cor. 2:23-25] Since then He Himself has declared and said of the Bread, (This is My Body), who shall dare to doubt any longer? And since He has affirmed and said, (This is My Blood), who shall ever hesitate, saying, that it is not His blood?

    -"Catechetical Lectures [22 (Mystagogic 4), 1]

    "Therefore with fullest assurance let us partake as of the Body and Blood of Christ: for in the figure of Bread is given to thee His Body, and in the figure of Wine His Blood; that thou by partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ, mightest be made of the same body and the same blood with Him. For thus we come to bear Christ in us, because His Body and Blood are diffused through our members; thus it is that, according to the blessed Peter, (we become partaker of the divine nature.) [2 Peter 1:4]

    -"Catechetical Lectures [22 (Mystagogic 4), 3]

    "Contemplate therefore the Bread and Wine not as bare elements, for they are, according to the Lord's declaration, the Body and Blood of Christ; for though sense suggests this to thee, let faith stablish thee. Judge not the matter from taste, but from faith be fully assured without misgiving, that thou hast been vouchsafed the Body and Blood of Christ.

    -"Catechetical Lectures [22 (Mystagogic 4), 6]"

    "9. These things having learnt, and being fully persuaded that what seems bread is not bread, though bread by taste, but the Body of Christ; and that what seems wine is not wine, though the taste will have it so, but the Blood of Christ; and that of this David sung of old, saying, (And bread which strengtheneth man's heart, and oil to make his face to shine) [Ps. 104:15], `strengthen thine heart', partaking thereof as spiritual, and `make the face of thy soul to shine'. And so having it unveiled by a pure conscience, mayest thou behold as in a glass the glory of the Lord, and proceed from glory to glory [2 Cor. 3:18], in Christ Jesus our Lord:--To whom be honor, and might, and glory, for ever and ever. Amen."

    Source: St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogic Catechesis 4,1, c. 350 A.D.:

    "Then upon the completion of the spiritual Sacrifice, the bloodless worship, over the propitiatory victim we call upon God for the common peace of the Churches, for the welfare of the world, for kings, for soldiers and allies, for the sick, for the afflicted; and in summary, we all pray and offer this Sacrifice for all who are in need."

    "Mystagogic Catechesis [23: 5-7]

    "Then we make mention also of those who have already fallen asleep: first, the patriarchs, prophets, Apostles, and martyrs, that through their prayers and supplications God would receive our petition; next, we make mention also of the holy fathers and bishops who have already fallen asleep, and, to put it simply, of all among us who have already fallen asleep; for we believe that it will be of very great benefit of the souls of those for whom the petition is carried up, while this holy and most solemn Sacrifice is laid out."

    -Mystagogic Catechesis [23 (Mystagogic 5), 10]

    "After this you hear the singing which invites you with a divine melody to the Communion of the Holy Mysteries, and which says, 'Taste and see that the Lord is good.' Do not trust to the judgement of the bodily palate - no, but to unwavering faith. For they who are urged to taste do not taste of bread and wine, but to the antitype, of the Body and Blood of Christ."

    -"Mystagogic Catecheses 5 23, 20 ca. 350 A.D

    "Keep these traditions inviolate, and preserve yourselves from offenses. Do not cut yourselves off from Communion, do not deprive yourselves, through the pollution of sins, of these Holy and Spiritual Mysteries."

    -"Mystagogic Catechesis [23 (Mystagogic 5), 23]"

ST. HILARY OF POITERS  (Alt)

St. Hilary firmly defended the Nicene Creed against Arian false doctrines. He was ordained Bishop of Poiters in 350 A.D. His efforts led to the collapse of Arianism in the West. He was proclaimed a Doctor of the Church by Pius IX in 1851.

    "When we speak of the reality of Christ's nature being in us, we would be speaking foolishly and impiously - had we not learned it from Him. For He Himself says: 'My Flesh is truly Food, and My Blood is truly Drink. He that eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood will remain in Me and I in him.' As to the reality of His Flesh and Blood, there is no room left for doubt, because now, both by the declaration of the Lord Himself and by our own faith, it is truly the Flesh and it is truly Blood. And These Elements bring it about, when taken and consumed, that we are in Christ and Christ is in us. Is this not true? Let those who deny that Jesus Christ is true God be free to find these things untrue. But He Himself is in us through the flesh and we are in Him, while that which we are with Him is in God."

    -"The Trinity" [8,14] inter 356-359 A.D.

ST. BASIL THE GREAT  (Alt)

St. Basil is recognized as the founder of Eastern monasticism. He was ordained Bishop of Caesarea in 370 A.D. He defended the Catholic Church against two waves of Arian attacks. The first movement denied the divinity of Christ. The second denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit. He is considered one of the greatest saints of the Oriental Church.

    "What is the mark of a Christian? That he be purified of all defilement of the flesh and of the spirit in the Blood of Christ, perfecting sanctification in the fear of God and the love of Christ, and that he have no blemish nor spot nor any such thing; that he be holy and blameless and so eat the Body of Christ and drink His Blood; for 'he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgement to himself.' What is the mark of those who eat the Bread and drink the Cup of Christ? That they keep in perpetual remembrance Him who died for us and rose again."

    -"The Morals" Ch. 22

    "He, therefore, who approaches the Body and Blood of Christ in commemoration of Him who died for us and rose again must be free not only from defilement of flesh and spirit, in order that he may not eat drink unto judgement, but he must actively manifest the remembrance of Him who died for us and rose again, by being dead to sin, to the world, and to himself, and alive unto God in Christ Jesus, our Lord."

    -"Concerning Baptism" Book I, Ch. 3.

    "To communicate each day and to partake of the holy Body and Blood of Christ is good and beneficial; for He says quite plainly: 'He that eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood has eternal life.' Who can doubt that to share continually in life is the same thing as having life abundantly? We ourselves communicate four times each week, on Sunday, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday; and on other days if there is a commemoration of any saint."

    -"Letter to a Patrician Lady Caesaria" [93] ca. 372 A.D.

ST. EPIPHANIUS OF SALAMIS  (Alt)

    "We see that the Saviour took [something] in His hands, as it is in the Gospel, when He was reclining at the supper; and He took this, and giving thanks, He said: 'This is really Me.' And He gave to His disciples and said: 'This is really Me.' And we see that It is not equal nor similar, not to the incarnate image, not to the invisible divinity, not to the outline of His limbs. For It is round of shape, and devoid of feeling. As to Its power, He means to say even of Its grace, 'This is really Me.'; and none disbelieves His word. For anyone who does not believe the truth in what He says is deprived of grace and of a Savior."

    -"The Man Well-Anchored" [57] 374 A.D.

ST. GREGORY OF NAZIANZ  (Alt)

St. Gregory was consecrated Bishop of Sasima in the year 371 A.D and was a friend of St. Basil for most of his life.

    "Cease not to pray and plead for me when you draw down the Word by your word, when in an unbloody cutting you cut the Body and Blood of the Lord, using your voice for a sword."

    -"Letter to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium" [171] ca. 383 A.D.

ST. GREGORY OF NYSSA  (Alt)

    "Rightly then, do we believe that the bread consecrated by the word of God has been made over into the Body of the God the Word. For that Body was, as to its potency bread; but it has been consecrated by the lodging there of the Word, who pitched His tent in the flesh."

    -"The Great Catechism [37: 9-13]"

    "He offered Himself for us, Victim and Sacrifice, and Priest as well, and 'Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.' When did He do this? When He made His own Body food and His own Blood drink for His disciples; for this much is clear enough to anyone, that a sheep cannot be eaten by a man unless its being eaten be preceded by its being slaughtered. This giving of His own Body to His disciples for eating clearly indicates that the sacrifice of the Lamb has now been completed."

    -"Orations and Sermons" [Jaeger: Vol 9, p. 287] ca. 383 A.D.

    "The bread is at first common bread; but when the mystery sanctifies it, it is called and actually becomes the Body of Christ."

    -"Orations and Sermons" [Jaeger Vol 9, pp. 225-226] ca. 383 A.D.

ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM  (Alt)

From 386-397 A.D. St. John Chrysostom served as a priest in the main church of Antioch. He soon became renown for his preaching and writing skills. In 397 A.D. he succeeded St. Gregory of Nazianz as Bishop of Constantinople.

    "When the word says, 'This is My Body,' be convinced of it and believe it, and look at it with the eyes of the mind. For Christ did not give us something tangible, but even in His tangible things all is intellectual. So too with Baptism: the gift is bestowed through what is a tangible thing, water; but what is accomplished is intellectually perceived: the birth and the renewal. If you were incorporeal He would have given you those incorporeal gifts naked; but since the soul is intertwined with the body, He hands over to you in tangible things that which is perceived intellectually. How many now say, 'I wish I could see His shape, His appearance, His garments, His sandals.' Only look! You see Him! You touch Him! You eat Him!"

    -"Homilies on the Gospel of Matthew" [82,4] 370 A.D.

    "I wish to add something that is plainly awe-inspiring, but do not be astonished or upset. This Sacrifice, no matter who offers it, be it Peter or Paul, is always the same as that which Christ gave His disciples and which priests now offer: The offering of today is in no way inferior to that which Christ offered, because it is not men who sanctify the offering of today; it is the same Christ who sanctified His own. For just as the words which God spoke are the very same as those which the priest now speaks, so too the oblation is the very same."

    Source: St. John Chrysostom, "Homilies on the Second Epistle to Timothy," 2,4, c. 397 A.D.

    "It is not the power of man which makes what is put before us the Body and Blood of Christ, but the power of Christ Himself who was crucified for us. The priest standing there in the place of Christ says these words but their power and grace are from God. 'This is My Body,' he says, and these words transform what lies before him."

    Source: St. John Chrysostom, "Homilies on the Treachery of Judas" 1,6; d. 407 A.D.:

    "'The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not communion of the Blood of Christ?' Very trustworthily and awesomely does he say it. For what he is saying is this: 'What is in the cup is that which flowed from His side, and we partake of it.' He called it a cup of blessing because when we hold it in our hands that is how we praise Him in song, wondering and astonished at His indescribable Gift, blessing Him because of His having poured out this very Gift so that we might not remain in error, and not only for His having poured out It out, but also for His sharing It with all of us."

    -"Homilies on the First Letter to the Corinthians" [24,1] ca. 392 A.D.

ST. AMBROSE OF MILAN  (Alt)

    "You perhaps say: 'My bread is usual.' But the bread is bread before the words of the sacraments; when consecration has been added, from bread it becomes the flesh of Christ. So let us confirm this, how it is possible that what is bread is the body of Christ. By what words, then, is the consecration and by whose expressions? By those of the Lord Jesus. For all the rest that are said in the preceding are said by the priest: praise to God, prayer is offered, there is a petition for the people, for kings, for the rest. When it comes to performing a venerable sacrament, then the priest uses not his own expressions, but he uses the expressions of Christ. Thus the expression of Christ performs this sacrament."

    -"The Sacraments" Book 4, Ch.4:14.

    "Let us be assured that this is not what nature formed, but what the blessing consecrated, and that greater efficacy resides in the blessing than in nature, for by the blessing nature is changed… . Surely the word of Christ, which could make out of nothing that which did not exist, can change things already in existence into what they were not. For it is no less extraordinary to give things new natures than to change their natures… . Christ is in that Sacrament, because it is the Body of Christ; yet, it is not on that account corporeal food, but spiritual. Whence also His Apostle says of the type: `For our fathers ate spiritual food and drink spiritual drink.' [1 Cor. 10:2-4] For the body of God is a spiritual body."

    -"On the Mysteries" 9, 50-52, 58; 391 A.D.:

    "His poverty enriches, the fringe of His garment heals, His hunger satisfies, His death gives life, His burial gives resurrection. Therefore, He is a rich treasure, for His bread is rich. And 'rich' is apt for one who has eaten this bread will be unable to feel hunger. He gave it to the Apostles to distribute to a believing people, and today He gives it to us, for He, as a priest, daily consecrates it with His own words. Therefore, this bread has become the food of the saints."

    -"The Patriarchs" Ch. 9:38

    "Thus, every soul which receives the bread which comes down from heaven is a house of bread, the bread of Christ, being nourished and having its heart strengthened by the support of the heavenly bread which dwells within it."

    -"Letter to Horontianus" circa 387 A.D.

EGERIA

    "Following the dismissal from the Martyrium, everyone proceeds behind the Cross, where, after a hymn is sung and a prayer is said, the bishop offers the sacrifice and everyone receives Communion. Except on this one day, throughout the year the sacrifice is never offered behind the Cross save on this day alone."

    -"Diary of a Pilgrimage" Ch. 35.

Describes a Mass held in front of Mt. Sinai.

    "All of the proper passage from the Book of Moses was read, the sacrifice was offered in the prescribed manner, and we received Communion."

    -"Diary of a Pilgrimage" Ch. 3.

AURELIUS PRUDENTIUS CLEMENS  (Alt)

    "Such is the hidden retreat where Hippolytus' body is buried. Next to an altar nearby, built for the worship of God. Table from which the sacrament all holy is given, close to the martyr it stands, set as a faithful guard."

    -"Hymns for Every Day" Hymn 170.

ST. JEROME  (Alt)

    "After the type had been fulfilled by the Passover celebration and He had eaten the flesh of the lamb with His Apostles, He takes bread which strengthens the heart of man, and goes on to the true Sacrament of the Passover, so that just as Melchisedech, the priest of the Most High God, in prefiguring Him, made bread and wine an offering, He too makes Himself manifest in the reality of His own Body and Blood."

    -"Commentaries on the Gospel of Matthew" [4,26,26] 398 A.D.

APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS

    "A bishop gives the blessing, he does not receive it. He imposes hands, he ordains, he offers the Sacrifice"

    "Apostolic Constitutions [8, 28, 2:9]"

ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA  (Alt)

    "Christ said indicating (the bread and wine): 'This is My Body,' and "This is My Blood," in order that you might not judge what you see to be a mere figure. The offerings, by the hidden power of God Almighty, are changed into Christ's Body and Blood, and by receiving these we come to share in the life-giving and sanctifying efficacy of Christ."

    Source: St. Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew 26,27, 428 A.D.:

    "We have been instructed in these matters and filled with an unshakable faith, that that which seems to be bread, is not bread, though it tastes like it, but the Body of Christ, and that which seems to be wine, is not wine, though it too tastes as such, but the Blood of Christ … draw inner strength by receiving this bread as spiritual food and your soul will rejoice."

    Source: St. Cyril of Alexandria, "Catecheses," 22, 9; "Myst." 4; d. 444 A.D.:

ST. AUGUSTINE  (Alt)

    "You ought to know what you have received, what you are going to receive, and what you ought to receive daily. That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Body of Christ. The chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Blood of Christ."

    -"Sermons", [227, 21]

    "He who made you men, for your sakes was Himself made man; to ensure your adoption as many sons into an everlasting inheritance, the blood of the Only-Begotten has been shed for you. If in your own reckoning you have held yourselves cheap because of your earthly frailty, now assess yourselves by the price paid for you; meditate, as you should, upon what you eat, what you drink, to what you answer 'Amen'".

    -"Second Discourse on Psalm 32". Ch. 4. circa

    "For the whole Church observes this practice which was handed down by the Fathers: that it prayers for those who have died in the communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, when they are commemorated in their own place in the sacrifice itself; and the sacrifice is offered also in memory of them on their behalf.

    Source: St. Augustine, Sermons 172,2, circa 400 A.D.

    "The fact that our fathers of old offered sacrifices with beasts for victims, which the present-day people of God read about but do not do, is to be understood in no way but this: that those things signified the things that we do in order to draw near to God and to recommend to our neighbor the same purpose. A visible sacrifice, therefore, is the sacrament, that is to say, the sacred sign, of an invisible sacrifice… . Christ is both the Priest, offering Himself, and Himself the Victim. He willed that the sacramental sign of this should be the daily sacrifice of the Church, who, since the Church is His body and He the Head, learns to offer herself through Him.

    Source: St. Augustine, The City of God, 10, 5; 10,20, c. 426:

MARCARIUS THE MAGNESIAN

    "[Christ] took the bread and the cup, each in a similar fashion, and said: 'This is My Body and this is My Blood.' Not a figure of His body nor a figure of His blood, as some persons of petrified mind are wont to rhapsodize, but in truth the Body and the Blood of Christ, seeing that His body is from the earth, and the bread and wine are likewise from the earth."

    -"Apocriticus" [3,23] ca. 400 A.D.

ST. LEO I  (Alt)

    "When the Lord says: 'Unless you shall have eaten the flesh of the Son of Man and shall have drunk His blood, you shall not have life in you,' you ought to so communicate at the Sacred Table that you have no doubt whatever of the truth of the Body and the Blood of Christ. For that which is taken in the mouth is what is believed in faith; and in do those respond, 'Amen,' who argue against that which is received."

    -"Sermons" [91,3] ante 461 A.D.

ST. CAESAR OF ARLES  (Alt)

    "As often as some infirmity overtakes a man, let him who is ill receive the Body and Blood of Christ."

    -"Sermons [13 (265), 3]

ST. FULGENE OF RUSPE  (Alt)

    "Hold most firmly and never doubt in the least that the Only-begotten God the Word Himself become flesh offered Himself in an odor of sweetness as a Sacrifice and Victim to God on our behalf; to whom, with the Father, and the Holy Spirit, in the time of the Old Testament animals were sacrificed by the patriarchs and prophets and priests; and to whom now, I mean in the time of the New Testament, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, with whom He has one Godhead, the Holy Catholic Church does not cease in faith and love to offer throughout all the lands of the world a sacrifice of Bread and Wine … In those former sacrifices what would be given us in the future was signified figuratively; but in this sacrifice which has now been given us, it is shown plainly. In those former sacrifices it was fore-announced that the Son of God would be killed for the impious; but in the present it is announced that He has been killed for the impious."

    -"The Rule of Faith [62]"
http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/father/a5.html

stay blessed,
habte selassie
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 07:51:54 PM by HabteSelassie » Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Volnutt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Agnostic/Universalist
Posts: 3,107


« Reply #76 on: August 07, 2011, 08:04:18 PM »

and isn`t it moraly wrong to do cannibalism even figuratively?
Isn't a symbolic Eucharist also figurative cannibalism? At least the Orthodox have the "divinized flesh/not eaten after a fleshly manner" thing.
Logged
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,707


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #77 on: August 07, 2011, 08:09:01 PM »

A thought: whenever people wig out about the Eucharist being like 'cannibalism,' I ask them, 'Have you ever chewed your fingernail?" It's silly, but it shows that this fear is not necessary.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Volnutt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Agnostic/Universalist
Posts: 3,107


« Reply #78 on: August 07, 2011, 08:11:27 PM »

Thanks for reminding me. I keep forgetting about that point (first heard from a Lutheran).
Logged
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #79 on: August 07, 2011, 08:42:11 PM »

don`t have time the common courtesy to do that,
I think this fix is more in line with what you should really admit. If you want us to believe something, it's your job to convince us. Don't expect us to do your homework for you.

Seriously.
Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,532


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #80 on: August 08, 2011, 12:39:46 AM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.
Just curious, Mina. How did the text in the subject line change with this post I here quote?
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,305


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #81 on: August 08, 2011, 12:43:52 AM »

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.
Just curious, Mina. How did the text in the subject line change with this post I here quote?

Oh my.  I have no idea.  I just noticed it now only after you brought it up.  My only guess is that it might be an iPhone issue.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,768


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #82 on: August 08, 2011, 02:14:49 AM »

Lost, from a historical perspective, you are endorsing weird crackpot theories that modern historians do not indulge.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
lost
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


« Reply #83 on: August 08, 2011, 11:45:13 AM »

don`t have time the common courtesy to do that,
I think this fix is more in line with what you should really admit. If you want us to believe something, it's your job to convince us. Don't expect us to do your homework for you.

I`m not here to convince anyone.I am here to be convinced.Someone mentioned the Didache and I just said that for me Didache is not a viable argument.

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/
lost,

It appears that you've started a bit of a firestorm with your claim that the Didache is an unreliable forgery. Therefore, to preserve the peace of this thread the moderators have deemed it necessary to ask you to back up your claim with evidence. The above link does not appear to do that, since the linked article mentions nothing of the Didache (at least nothing that I could find). You therefore have until 6:00 p.m. (Eastern U.S. Time) on Wednesday, August 10, to back up your claim with reference to a scholarly source, in English or translated to English, that says exactly that the Didache is a forgery or is suspected to be a forgery. Since I may have missed the above blog post's reference to the Didache, I will also accept you pointing out exactly how that blog post supports your claim. Either way, failure to either support your claim with evidence or retract it within the three days you've been given will result in further disciplinary action against you.

- PeterTheAleut
Moderator


not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/


Well you're out of luck with me.  Don't understand the language.  Maybe you can help by summarizing or translating a quote that verifies your claims.  Or someone else who understands the article may help you.


But to see that I have the common courtessy :

From http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/ translated via google translate :

"Quinisext came Synod (Constatinopole, 691-692) is the first to censor some Western practices: celibate clergy (can. 1:30 p.m.), fasting Saturday (can. 55), consumption of cattle strangled and blood (can. 67), representation of Christ as lamb (can. 82) [21]. He saw this as an act of hostility towards the Western Church, the first confessional statement of war [22]. In fact, the council was a response to the claim of Rome Oriental, based on papal primacy, the widespread practice throughout the Church [23]. Interestingly, the council recalled that patriarchates order, as was established by councils II (can. 3) and fourth ecumenical (can. 28) to show that papal primacy was only one of honor, not actual authority. Moreover, the council mentioned in the 102 canons Quinisext came a lot of ways, some of which in African Church or Armenian Church, but in most Eastern Churches, which prohibit critical. Of the others, only two - the celibate clergy and fasting Saturday - is indication that they practice the Roman Church. Neither one nor the other of these practices was not observed and then stopped for the first time. Mandatory celibacy of the clergy, introduced in Spain in the year 300 the Council of Elvira (can. 33), was forbidden by the canons called "apostolic" (5), and fasting Saturdays (except Saturday Passion) the apostolic canon 65 [24 ]."

Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,305


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #84 on: August 08, 2011, 11:57:36 AM »

don`t have time the common courtesy to do that,
I think this fix is more in line with what you should really admit. If you want us to believe something, it's your job to convince us. Don't expect us to do your homework for you.

I`m not here to convince anyone.I am here to be convinced.Someone mentioned the Didache and I just said that for me Didache is not a viable argument.

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/
lost,

It appears that you've started a bit of a firestorm with your claim that the Didache is an unreliable forgery. Therefore, to preserve the peace of this thread the moderators have deemed it necessary to ask you to back up your claim with evidence. The above link does not appear to do that, since the linked article mentions nothing of the Didache (at least nothing that I could find). You therefore have until 6:00 p.m. (Eastern U.S. Time) on Wednesday, August 10, to back up your claim with reference to a scholarly source, in English or translated to English, that says exactly that the Didache is a forgery or is suspected to be a forgery. Since I may have missed the above blog post's reference to the Didache, I will also accept you pointing out exactly how that blog post supports your claim. Either way, failure to either support your claim with evidence or retract it within the three days you've been given will result in further disciplinary action against you.

- PeterTheAleut
Moderator


not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/


Well you're out of luck with me.  Don't understand the language.  Maybe you can help by summarizing or translating a quote that verifies your claims.  Or someone else who understands the article may help you.


But to see that I have the common courtessy :

From http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/ translated via google translate :

"Quinisext came Synod (Constatinopole, 691-692) is the first to censor some Western practices: celibate clergy (can. 1:30 p.m.), fasting Saturday (can. 55), consumption of cattle strangled and blood (can. 67), representation of Christ as lamb (can. 82) [21]. He saw this as an act of hostility towards the Western Church, the first confessional statement of war [22]. In fact, the council was a response to the claim of Rome Oriental, based on papal primacy, the widespread practice throughout the Church [23]. Interestingly, the council recalled that patriarchates order, as was established by councils II (can. 3) and fourth ecumenical (can. 28) to show that papal primacy was only one of honor, not actual authority. Moreover, the council mentioned in the 102 canons Quinisext came a lot of ways, some of which in African Church or Armenian Church, but in most Eastern Churches, which prohibit critical. Of the others, only two - the celibate clergy and fasting Saturday - is indication that they practice the Roman Church. Neither one nor the other of these practices was not observed and then stopped for the first time. Mandatory celibacy of the clergy, introduced in Spain in the year 300 the Council of Elvira (can. 33), was forbidden by the canons called "apostolic" (5), and fasting Saturdays (except Saturday Passion) the apostolic canon 65 [24 ]."



The part you quoted says nothing about the Didache.  Therefore your rejection of the Didache is unfounded.  So according to your standards, the Didache is a perfectly valid and acceptable source to use.  Perhaps if you knew Romanian rather than using google translate, you wouldn't even embarrass yourself with this (and if you do know Romanian, then that would look worse on your part, suggesting laziness, stupidity, and/or ulterior motives).
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
lost
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


« Reply #85 on: August 08, 2011, 12:12:12 PM »

don`t have time the common courtesy to do that,
I think this fix is more in line with what you should really admit. If you want us to believe something, it's your job to convince us. Don't expect us to do your homework for you.

I`m not here to convince anyone.I am here to be convinced.Someone mentioned the Didache and I just said that for me Didache is not a viable argument.

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/
lost,

It appears that you've started a bit of a firestorm with your claim that the Didache is an unreliable forgery. Therefore, to preserve the peace of this thread the moderators have deemed it necessary to ask you to back up your claim with evidence. The above link does not appear to do that, since the linked article mentions nothing of the Didache (at least nothing that I could find). You therefore have until 6:00 p.m. (Eastern U.S. Time) on Wednesday, August 10, to back up your claim with reference to a scholarly source, in English or translated to English, that says exactly that the Didache is a forgery or is suspected to be a forgery. Since I may have missed the above blog post's reference to the Didache, I will also accept you pointing out exactly how that blog post supports your claim. Either way, failure to either support your claim with evidence or retract it within the three days you've been given will result in further disciplinary action against you.

- PeterTheAleut
Moderator


not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/


Well you're out of luck with me.  Don't understand the language.  Maybe you can help by summarizing or translating a quote that verifies your claims.  Or someone else who understands the article may help you.


But to see that I have the common courtessy :

From http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/ translated via google translate :

"Quinisext came Synod (Constatinopole, 691-692) is the first to censor some Western practices: celibate clergy (can. 1:30 p.m.), fasting Saturday (can. 55), consumption of cattle strangled and blood (can. 67), representation of Christ as lamb (can. 82) [21]. He saw this as an act of hostility towards the Western Church, the first confessional statement of war [22]. In fact, the council was a response to the claim of Rome Oriental, based on papal primacy, the widespread practice throughout the Church [23]. Interestingly, the council recalled that patriarchates order, as was established by councils II (can. 3) and fourth ecumenical (can. 28) to show that papal primacy was only one of honor, not actual authority. Moreover, the council mentioned in the 102 canons Quinisext came a lot of ways, some of which in African Church or Armenian Church, but in most Eastern Churches, which prohibit critical. Of the others, only two - the celibate clergy and fasting Saturday - is indication that they practice the Roman Church. Neither one nor the other of these practices was not observed and then stopped for the first time. Mandatory celibacy of the clergy, introduced in Spain in the year 300 the Council of Elvira (can. 33), was forbidden by the canons called "apostolic" (5), and fasting Saturdays (except Saturday Passion) the apostolic canon 65 [24 ]."



The part you quoted says nothing about the Didache.  Therefore your rejection of the Didache is unfounded.  So according to your standards, the Didache is a perfectly valid and acceptable source to use.  Perhaps if you knew Romanian rather than using google translate, you wouldn't even embarrass yourself with this (and if you do know Romanian, then that would look worse on your part, suggesting laziness, stupidity, and/or ulterior motives).

what is it with the hostility?why are you insulting me? i don`t have to justify my believes to anyone... For me Didache is unreliable ... because according to my senses it was most unlikely not written by the Apostles... and in that time many false writings have circulated assimilated with big names, to make them look more genuine... I don`t have to justify it and/or convince anyone of it... That is not my scope... I just told you that for me it's not that reliable... You insisted more on this...

even so, this http://www.crestinortodox.ro/carti-ortodoxe/parinti-scriitori-bisericesti/literatura-pseudo-apostolica-81421.html romanian orthodox site speaks of the Didache and Apostolic Constitutions as PSEUDO-APOSTOLIC :

 "- Didascalia Apostolilor - adica "invatatura adevarata a celor 12 Apostoli". Autorul e episcop si scrie lucrarea undeva in nordul Siriei, pentru o comunitate recrutata dintre pagani. Trateaza despre persoanele casatorite, despre ierarhia bisericeasca, indeosebi despre episcop, care are o autoritate absoluta in domeniul doctrinei, al Tainelor si al treburilor temporale. Vorbeste apoi despre ierarhia inferioara, despre Botez, serviciul divin, post. Urmeaza probleme doctrinare: invierea mortilor, legatura dintre Lege si Evanghelie. "

now my translation(my english is really bad) : The Didache - the true teachings of the 12 Apostles.. Its author is a bishop who makes his writing somewhere in the north of Syria, for a community recruted among pagans.. He tracted about marriage, church hierarchy , essp bishop, whom has an absolute authority in doctrine sacraments and works of the times.. He then speaks of the inferior hierarchy , about Baptism, divine service, fast.Next doctrinal problems : resurrection of the death and the connection between the Law and the Gospel.

Some of us are really tired from working all day.. unlike others who only ramble around here playing the frustrated cops..



Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,305


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #86 on: August 08, 2011, 12:28:09 PM »

But no one claims that it was written by the Apostles, but that it was Apostolic in nature.  There's a difference.  I could write a book that talks about the beliefs of my own father, but that doesn't mean my father wrote it.  Your rejection of the Didache is nonsensical.  Everyone has to justify their beliefs.  You don't just come here willy-nilly like an immature child and say, "I'm not gonna tell" when in fact you bring up an argument that no scholar of the right mind would agree.  How else can we help you answer your questions when you bring up arguments that is unheard of and frankly stupid, and then say "I don't have to justify them."  Really?  Does a lawyer accuse someone of a crime without justifying his beliefs with evidence?  That is utter stupidity.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2011, 12:29:00 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #87 on: August 08, 2011, 01:19:29 PM »

For me Didache is unreliable ... because according to my senses it was most unlikely not written by the Apostles...

Your "senses" may be good enough for you, but you are on a FORUM. This is a public venue for the exchange of ideas and information. Participation in the public square brings with it responsibilities towards your fellow human beings. The members of this forum have every right to demand of you honesty, courtesy, intellectual seriousness, and the ability to back your claims/provide an objective case. You seem to feel this is too demanding. Perhaps then you should not be engaging in public discussion.
Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,768


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #88 on: August 08, 2011, 02:20:17 PM »

Lost, if you make a claim, you have to convince people of it. You can't just sit here like a slug and wait to "be convinced" of something.

Go back and read my post on the previous page.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2011, 02:20:53 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,532


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #89 on: August 08, 2011, 02:41:36 PM »

don`t have time the common courtesy to do that,
I think this fix is more in line with what you should really admit. If you want us to believe something, it's your job to convince us. Don't expect us to do your homework for you.

I`m not here to convince anyone.I am here to be convinced.Someone mentioned the Didache and I just said that for me Didache is not a viable argument.

not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/
lost,

It appears that you've started a bit of a firestorm with your claim that the Didache is an unreliable forgery. Therefore, to preserve the peace of this thread the moderators have deemed it necessary to ask you to back up your claim with evidence. The above link does not appear to do that, since the linked article mentions nothing of the Didache (at least nothing that I could find). You therefore have until 6:00 p.m. (Eastern U.S. Time) on Wednesday, August 10, to back up your claim with reference to a scholarly source, in English or translated to English, that says exactly that the Didache is a forgery or is suspected to be a forgery. Since I may have missed the above blog post's reference to the Didache, I will also accept you pointing out exactly how that blog post supports your claim. Either way, failure to either support your claim with evidence or retract it within the three days you've been given will result in further disciplinary action against you.

- PeterTheAleut
Moderator


not sure how much its reliability is... and how authentic it is, and how valid it is...

If you're not sure then why are mentioning it?  At least give the references to your claims so that we might have an idea how to answer them.

I need reliable... sure things... not questionable... i am questionable enough, and if anything has a drop of unreliable in it, i will dismiss it...

What are you talking about? I asked you for sources in your claims against the Didache and you said you're not sure if it's reliable.  Which reliability are you talking about?

it's not reliable as authentic and intact... and by the way we are getting astrayed of the subject of this thread which is the Eucharist.

Ok.  Then have the common decency to back that up.  What are your sources?

my source is this : http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/


Well you're out of luck with me.  Don't understand the language.  Maybe you can help by summarizing or translating a quote that verifies your claims.  Or someone else who understands the article may help you.


But to see that I have the common courtessy :

From http://acvila30.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/geneza-si-evolutia-schismei-de-la-1054/ translated via google translate :

"Quinisext came Synod (Constatinopole, 691-692) is the first to censor some Western practices: celibate clergy (can. 1:30 p.m.), fasting Saturday (can. 55), consumption of cattle strangled and blood (can. 67), representation of Christ as lamb (can. 82) [21]. He saw this as an act of hostility towards the Western Church, the first confessional statement of war [22]. In fact, the council was a response to the claim of Rome Oriental, based on papal primacy, the widespread practice throughout the Church [23]. Interestingly, the council recalled that patriarchates order, as was established by councils II (can. 3) and fourth ecumenical (can. 28) to show that papal primacy was only one of honor, not actual authority. Moreover, the council mentioned in the 102 canons Quinisext came a lot of ways, some of which in African Church or Armenian Church, but in most Eastern Churches, which prohibit critical. Of the others, only two - the celibate clergy and fasting Saturday - is indication that they practice the Roman Church. Neither one nor the other of these practices was not observed and then stopped for the first time. Mandatory celibacy of the clergy, introduced in Spain in the year 300 the Council of Elvira (can. 33), was forbidden by the canons called "apostolic" (5), and fasting Saturdays (except Saturday Passion) the apostolic canon 65 [24 ]."



The part you quoted says nothing about the Didache.  Therefore your rejection of the Didache is unfounded.  So according to your standards, the Didache is a perfectly valid and acceptable source to use.  Perhaps if you knew Romanian rather than using google translate, you wouldn't even embarrass yourself with this (and if you do know Romanian, then that would look worse on your part, suggesting laziness, stupidity, and/or ulterior motives).

what is it with the hostility?why are you insulting me? i don`t have to justify my believes to anyone... For me Didache is unreliable ... because according to my senses it was most unlikely not written by the Apostles... and in that time many false writings have circulated assimilated with big names, to make them look more genuine... I don`t have to justify it and/or convince anyone of it... That is not my scope... I just told you that for me it's not that reliable... You insisted more on this...

even so, this http://www.crestinortodox.ro/carti-ortodoxe/parinti-scriitori-bisericesti/literatura-pseudo-apostolica-81421.html romanian orthodox site speaks of the Didache and Apostolic Constitutions as PSEUDO-APOSTOLIC :

 "- Didascalia Apostolilor - adica "invatatura adevarata a celor 12 Apostoli". Autorul e episcop si scrie lucrarea undeva in nordul Siriei, pentru o comunitate recrutata dintre pagani. Trateaza despre persoanele casatorite, despre ierarhia bisericeasca, indeosebi despre episcop, care are o autoritate absoluta in domeniul doctrinei, al Tainelor si al treburilor temporale. Vorbeste apoi despre ierarhia inferioara, despre Botez, serviciul divin, post. Urmeaza probleme doctrinare: invierea mortilor, legatura dintre Lege si Evanghelie. "

now my translation(my english is really bad) : The Didache - the true teachings of the 12 Apostles.. Its author is a bishop who makes his writing somewhere in the north of Syria, for a community recruted among pagans.. He tracted about marriage, church hierarchy , essp bishop, whom has an absolute authority in doctrine sacraments and works of the times.. He then speaks of the inferior hierarchy , about Baptism, divine service, fast.Next doctrinal problems : resurrection of the death and the connection between the Law and the Gospel.

Some of us are really tired from working all day.. unlike others who only ramble around here playing the frustrated cops..




Thank you. Though I personally don't find this essay convincing evidence that the Didache is an unreliable forgery, I can only ask formally for a source document that offers support for your claim. The document you provided above satisfies my request. Smiley
« Last Edit: August 08, 2011, 02:42:41 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Tags: Didache 
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  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 0.32 seconds with 72 queries.