OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 22, 2014, 10:48:59 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   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Consubstantiation  (Read 818 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« on: February 24, 2013, 05:16:26 PM »

It is the Blood of Christ, yes, but it also remains wine all the same.

So the hypostatic union is not between God and man but between God, man and fermented grapes?
Huh What is that supposed to mean? Huh

How can something be both the blood of Christ and wine unless it is hypostatically united?
1. What does hypostatic union have to do with whether the Body and Blood is in truth still bread and wine even after becoming also Body and Blood?
2. Do you even know what hypostatic union is?
3. If you wish to debate this, would you be willing to start a new thread so we don't derail this one?

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing. So if communion is both Christ and bread/wine, He has become hypostatically united to food and become re-incarnated, as it were, rather than the bread and wine becoming Body and Blood in the forms of bread and wine.

2. Maybe

3. Ok.
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,053


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #1 on: February 24, 2013, 05:31:11 PM »

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing.
The Hypostatic Union is not two hypostases becoming one thing in Roman Orthodox Christian expression. Rather, natures, essences, operations, powers, whatnot are united by/in/through one Hypostasis. Christ unites human and divine nature in his one Hypostasis.

"The hypostatic union means that the the Divine Logos, that is to say one hypostasis of the three divine hypostases, is not united to a man who has his own hypostasis before, but that in the womb of the Holy Virgin the Divine Logos made for himself, in his own hypostasis, flesh that was taken from her and that was endowed with a reasonable and intellectual soul, i.e. human nature." -Edict on the True Faith, promulgated by Emperor Justinian
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 05:42:50 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.
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,626



« Reply #2 on: February 24, 2013, 05:38:10 PM »

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing.
The Hypostatic Union is not two hypostases becoming one thing in Roman Orthodox Christian expression. Rather, natures, essences, operations, powers, whatnot are united by/in/through one Hypostasis. Christ unites human and divine nature in his one Hypostasis.

This was my thought too. We of course reject impanation, but I think that we ought to take seriously the Lutheran objection that the sacramental union and consubstantiation are not the same as impanation.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 05:40:19 PM by Cavaradossi » Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #3 on: February 24, 2013, 05:39:49 PM »

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing.
The Hypostatic Union is not two hypostases becoming one thing in Roman Orthodox Christian expression. Rather, natures, essences, operations, powers, whatnot are united by/in/through one Hypostasis. Christ unites human and divine nature in his one Hypostasis.

What's the distinction?
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,937



« Reply #4 on: February 24, 2013, 05:40:43 PM »

My initial thought when reading the headline was "marriage".
Logged

NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,053


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #5 on: February 24, 2013, 05:43:51 PM »

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing.
The Hypostatic Union is not two hypostases becoming one thing in Roman Orthodox Christian expression. Rather, natures, essences, operations, powers, whatnot are united by/in/through one Hypostasis. Christ unites human and divine nature in his one Hypostasis.

What's the distinction?
You state that two hypostases are becoming one thing, rather than two natures being united in one Hypostasis.
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.
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #6 on: February 24, 2013, 05:46:08 PM »

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing.
The Hypostatic Union is not two hypostases becoming one thing in Roman Orthodox Christian expression. Rather, natures, essences, operations, powers, whatnot are united by/in/through one Hypostasis. Christ unites human and divine nature in his one Hypostasis.

What's the distinction?
You state that two hypostases are becoming one thing, rather than two natures being united in one Hypostasis.

Two hypostases become one hypostasis?
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,053


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #7 on: February 24, 2013, 05:47:38 PM »

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing.
The Hypostatic Union is not two hypostases becoming one thing in Roman Orthodox Christian expression. Rather, natures, essences, operations, powers, whatnot are united by/in/through one Hypostasis. Christ unites human and divine nature in his one Hypostasis.

What's the distinction?
You state that two hypostases are becoming one thing, rather than two natures being united in one Hypostasis.

Two hypostases become one hypostasis?
My point is that there are no two hypostases to start out with. You have human nature and divine nature, neither of which have any ontology apart from a grounding Hypostasis. That single, grounding Hypostasis is the Logos in the case of the incarnation.
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.
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #8 on: February 24, 2013, 05:51:07 PM »

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing.
The Hypostatic Union is not two hypostases becoming one thing in Roman Orthodox Christian expression. Rather, natures, essences, operations, powers, whatnot are united by/in/through one Hypostasis. Christ unites human and divine nature in his one Hypostasis.

What's the distinction?
You state that two hypostases are becoming one thing, rather than two natures being united in one Hypostasis.

Two hypostases become one hypostasis?
My point is that there are no two hypostases to start out with. You have human nature and divine nature, neither of which have any ontology apart from a grounding Hypostasis. That single, grounding Hypostasis is the Logos in the case of the incarnation.

So the hypostasis of the Logos has abstract divine nature and takes on abstract human nature in the Incarnation?
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 05:51:16 PM by William » Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 9,782


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #9 on: February 24, 2013, 05:57:23 PM »

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

- St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Cathechetical Lectures 22:6

"The body which is born of the holy Virgin is in truth body united with divinity, not that the body which was received up into the heavens descends, but that the bread itself and the wine are changed into God's body and blood"

- St. John of Damascus, Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, IV:13

Consubstantiation sounds heretical to me.
Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,053


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #10 on: February 24, 2013, 05:58:28 PM »

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing.
The Hypostatic Union is not two hypostases becoming one thing in Roman Orthodox Christian expression. Rather, natures, essences, operations, powers, whatnot are united by/in/through one Hypostasis. Christ unites human and divine nature in his one Hypostasis.

What's the distinction?
You state that two hypostases are becoming one thing, rather than two natures being united in one Hypostasis.

Two hypostases become one hypostasis?
My point is that there are no two hypostases to start out with. You have human nature and divine nature, neither of which have any ontology apart from a grounding Hypostasis. That single, grounding Hypostasis is the Logos in the case of the incarnation.

So the hypostasis of the Logos has abstract divine nature and takes on abstract human nature in the Incarnation?
Abstract, apart from hypostases. We only conceive of abstract natures in contemplation.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 05:58:40 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.
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #11 on: February 24, 2013, 06:00:56 PM »

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing.
The Hypostatic Union is not two hypostases becoming one thing in Roman Orthodox Christian expression. Rather, natures, essences, operations, powers, whatnot are united by/in/through one Hypostasis. Christ unites human and divine nature in his one Hypostasis.

What's the distinction?
You state that two hypostases are becoming one thing, rather than two natures being united in one Hypostasis.

Two hypostases become one hypostasis?
My point is that there are no two hypostases to start out with. You have human nature and divine nature, neither of which have any ontology apart from a grounding Hypostasis. That single, grounding Hypostasis is the Logos in the case of the incarnation.

So the hypostasis of the Logos has abstract divine nature and takes on abstract human nature in the Incarnation?
Abstract, apart from hypostases. We only conceive of abstract natures in contemplation.

Does wine have a hypostasis or a nature?
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 9,782


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2013, 06:02:13 PM »

Does wine have a hypostasis or a nature?

Neither. It has ousia, or essence. But now we're getting all Aristotelian.

« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 06:02:49 PM by Cyrillic » Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #13 on: February 24, 2013, 06:04:06 PM »

Does wine have a hypostasis or a nature?

Neither. It has ousia, or essence. But now we're getting all Aristotelian.



What I'm trying to figure out is how Christ (a hypostasis) can coexist with wine without redoing the incarnation.
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 9,782


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #14 on: February 24, 2013, 06:08:37 PM »

What I'm trying to figure out is how Christ (a hypostasis) can coexist with wine without redoing the incarnation.

The ousia of wine is changed (metaballein in Greek) into the ousia of blood. There is no "coexisting".
Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,604



« Reply #15 on: February 24, 2013, 06:19:57 PM »

William I would recommend not getting roped into this confused use of "Greek" around here.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,604



« Reply #16 on: February 24, 2013, 06:20:55 PM »

What I'm trying to figure out is how Christ (a hypostasis) can coexist with wine without redoing the incarnation.

The ousia of wine is changed (metaballein in Greek) into the ousia of blood. There is no "coexisting".

I like thread when posts look more and more like the Orthodox Jewish Bible translation as they go along.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 06:21:26 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Posts: 9,782


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #17 on: February 24, 2013, 06:25:26 PM »

What I'm trying to figure out is how Christ (a hypostasis) can coexist with wine without redoing the incarnation.

The ousia of wine is changed (metaballein in Greek) into the ousia of blood. There is no "coexisting".

I like thread when posts look more and more like the Orthodox Jewish Bible translation as they go along.

 Wink

I did it to make it sound less like the Thomistic definition of transsubstantiation.
Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,626



« Reply #18 on: February 24, 2013, 07:06:07 PM »

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing.
The Hypostatic Union is not two hypostases becoming one thing in Roman Orthodox Christian expression. Rather, natures, essences, operations, powers, whatnot are united by/in/through one Hypostasis. Christ unites human and divine nature in his one Hypostasis.

What's the distinction?
You state that two hypostases are becoming one thing, rather than two natures being united in one Hypostasis.

Two hypostases become one hypostasis?
My point is that there are no two hypostases to start out with. You have human nature and divine nature, neither of which have any ontology apart from a grounding Hypostasis. That single, grounding Hypostasis is the Logos in the case of the incarnation.

So the hypostasis of the Logos has abstract divine nature and takes on abstract human nature in the Incarnation?
Abstract, apart from hypostases. We only conceive of abstract natures in contemplation.

Does wine have a hypostasis or a nature?

In patristic language, hypostasis eventually comes to refer to the particular. Thus, if I were to point to a stone or a horse, I would be referring to an hypostasis, which is distinguishable from all other things of its kind by its hypostatic characteristics, which are unique. To speak of wine which already exists and is accompanied by hypostatic characteristics would be to refer to an hypostasis. Nothing exists without hypostasis.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 07:07:25 PM by Cavaradossi » Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,899


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #19 on: February 24, 2013, 07:10:39 PM »

William, have you even read this thread as I suggested you should?

Do EO's partake of the Body and Blood and also Bread and Wine?
Logged
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #20 on: February 24, 2013, 07:18:09 PM »

William, have you even read this thread as I suggested you should?

Do EO's partake of the Body and Blood and also Bread and Wine?

Yes, except the stuff with Azul.
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,973


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #21 on: February 24, 2013, 10:31:57 PM »

Am I the only one uncomfortable comparing Christology to the Eucharist?
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,362


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #22 on: February 25, 2013, 12:26:55 AM »

I believe that people use too many big words to figure out big things that we can't possibly understand.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Nephi
Monster Tamer
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Byzantine
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,682



« Reply #23 on: February 25, 2013, 12:29:15 AM »

Am I the only one uncomfortable comparing Christology to the Eucharist?

As far as I know, it's fairly common - at least in Western Christianity. For example, IIRC, Calvin and Luther calling each other monophysite/nestorian over their understandings of the Eucharist.
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #24 on: February 25, 2013, 12:41:28 AM »

It is the Blood of Christ, yes, but it also remains wine all the same.

So the hypostatic union is not between God and man but between God, man and fermented grapes?
Huh What is that supposed to mean? Huh

How can something be both the blood of Christ and wine unless it is hypostatically united?
1. What does hypostatic union have to do with whether the Body and Blood is in truth still bread and wine even after becoming also Body and Blood?
2. Do you even know what hypostatic union is?
3. If you wish to debate this, would you be willing to start a new thread so we don't derail this one?

1. That is how the incarnation is explained; Christ is still God after becoming man because of the hypostatic union. It's how two different hypostases become one thing. So if communion is both Christ and bread/wine, He has become hypostatically united to food and become re-incarnated, as it were, rather than the bread and wine becoming Body and Blood in the forms of bread and wine.

2. Maybe

3. Ok.

So hypostasis=person (capitula 1 of Constantinople II).  The hypostatic union is two natures/essences in one person, not two persons (as you say) in one person or "thing."  That would be absurd.  Two persons cannot become one person.  Rather, a single person who was of the Divine nature also took on the human nature.  Communion is not Christ incarnating as bread and wine, but bread and wine becoming the Incarnate Body and Blood.     
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,899


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #25 on: February 25, 2013, 12:44:45 AM »

Am I the only one uncomfortable comparing Christology to the Eucharist?
No, you're not the only one.
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #26 on: February 25, 2013, 01:18:28 AM »

Am I the only one uncomfortable comparing Christology to the Eucharist?
No, you're not the only one.

"Comparing," probably not, but relating, yes.  St. Cyril was not uncomfortable with the fact that Eucharist is understood in the Incarnation, and that the Incarnation is demonstrable in the Eucharist. In fact, his tying the two together in the 3rd Ecumenical Council is one of the few references that we have to Eucharist in the Ecumenical Councils. 
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,899


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #27 on: February 25, 2013, 02:57:25 AM »

Whether or not it leads to violent behavior, intoxication from marijuana is still an intoxication and therefore should be avoided by anyone of the Christian faith. Drunkenness and Intoxication are the same things.

How dare someone compare alcohol to the Most-Precious and Life-Giving Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. First of all, its the Blood of Christ.
And yet, consuming what remains of the Holy Mysteries after the conclusion of the Liturgy can make a priest somewhat tipsy. It is the Blood of Christ, yes, but it also remains wine all the same.
I suppose I was probably a bit inarticulate in the above post. After having reviewed what Orthodox Christians have traditionally believed about the Eucharist, it would probably be more truthful for me to say that the bread and wine of Communion become the Body and Blood of Christ yet retain all the physical properties of bread and wine, including the ability to make one tipsy from overconsumption. To say that the bread and wine remain bread and wine even after also becoming Body and Blood of Christ may, however, be a rather confusing and not-so-safe way of describing how the consecrated Body and Blood retain the physical properties of bread and wine. Properties don't necessarily define what we believe something to be in its very essence. Since I like to preserve the mystery of the Holy Mysteries by not participating in any high falutin discussions of theological theory (i.e., transubstantiation, consubstantiation, impanation, etc.) regarding the Real Presence, I think I'll just leave it at that.
Logged
erimos
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 28



« Reply #28 on: February 25, 2013, 08:34:30 AM »

The Eucharist is both symbolic and mystical, and it is believed with faith to be the genuine Body and Blood of Christ. The bread and wine are the mysteries and symbols of God’s real presence and His appearance to us in Christ.

To the Orthodox Christian, the mystery of the Holy Eucharist defies analytical or logical explanation and no explanation is needed, especially because it belongs to God’s Kingdom and ‘not of this world’. This is an example of faith displayed by Orthodox Christians.

On this, St John of Damascus said some 1400 years ago, "If you enquire how this happens, it is enough for you to learn that it is through the Holy Spirit ... we know nothing more than this, that the word of God is true, active, and omnipotent, but in its manner of operation unsearchable”.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 08:35:02 AM by erimos » Logged
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 13,453



WWW
« Reply #29 on: February 25, 2013, 02:25:36 PM »


Whether or not it leads to violent behavior, intoxication from marijuana is still an intoxication and therefore should be avoided by anyone of the Christian faith. Drunkenness and Intoxication are the same things.

How dare someone compare alcohol to the Most-Precious and Life-Giving Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. First of all, its the Blood of Christ.
And yet, consuming what remains of the Holy Mysteries after the conclusion of the Liturgy can make a priest somewhat tipsy. It is the Blood of Christ, yes, but it also remains wine all the same.

If your church is anything like ours.....we usually have very few people coming up for Holy Communion, which leaves a good quantity to be consumed by our priest after Divine Liturgy.

...and yet, I've never heard of a priest driving "drunk" on a Sunday afternoon as a result of partaking of the Gifts.



Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,899


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #30 on: February 25, 2013, 02:53:55 PM »


Whether or not it leads to violent behavior, intoxication from marijuana is still an intoxication and therefore should be avoided by anyone of the Christian faith. Drunkenness and Intoxication are the same things.

How dare someone compare alcohol to the Most-Precious and Life-Giving Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. First of all, its the Blood of Christ.
And yet, consuming what remains of the Holy Mysteries after the conclusion of the Liturgy can make a priest somewhat tipsy. It is the Blood of Christ, yes, but it also remains wine all the same.

If your church is anything like ours.....we usually have very few people coming up for Holy Communion, which leaves a good quantity to be consumed by our priest after Divine Liturgy.

...and yet, I've never heard of a priest driving "drunk" on a Sunday afternoon as a result of partaking of the Gifts.
Then your experience is different from mine. I've never heard of our priest driving home "drunk" after the Liturgy, either, but then we have a communal meal after our Sunday Liturgy every week, and our priest's wife often drives regardless of his condition after the service. He has, however, spoken of being what he would call "a bit tipsy" after consuming the Holy Mysteries.
Logged
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #31 on: February 25, 2013, 02:54:44 PM »

I believe that people use too many big words to figure out big things that we can't possibly understand.

+1
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1   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 0.13 seconds with 59 queries.