 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > Communion Tomorrow -- What's the Implications of THAT? | Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 11/13/2006 9:44 AM (GMT -6) |   |
Again, Sahid, you have to pay attention to what is being said:
Of course, would I say that Christ literally IS the Vine, then I'd have to say what "vine" is, and my relationship to Him, within that reality.
Yes, "Vine" is a metaphor.  But it is still true.
And keeping straight the several analogic gems from that metaphor I could--and would--make a QUITE LITERAL statement about myself BEING IN that Vine. My statement itself would NOT be a metaphor. There are some quite exact ways that I am and you are "IN" Christ -- that are NOT metaphorical, but are real.
Now, if you follow that...then follow me when I write "Blood and body are different." 'Cause as Cyril wrote "...ye are become of the same body and blood with Christ."
THAT statement is literal, and not a metaphor. Christ's blood is not metaphorically his blood, but literally so. And his blood is really OUR blood when we are in Christ through the incarnation, passion, resurrection and glorification of our Lord and Savior.
Both symbolic AND real.
"
(o)Post Edited (PotOnWheel) : 11/13/2006 8:49:25 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 11/13/2006 11:17 AM (GMT -6) | | Hmmm. Here's what I do (cause I think it's how language works).
1) All truthful speech is reality depicting. See the two items standing in relationship? "Speech" and "reality." "Map" and "territory." Our "language" that aims at some "reality" to describe it.
2) Figure out just which of these two items the terms "literal" and "mataphorical" apply to. In my view they can ONLY apply to maps/language/speech. More specifically they describe HOW we're use language. We use language literally. We use it figuratively, or metaphorically. Or we use it sarcastically or hyperbolically or....
But we cannot ascribe "literal" and "metaphorical" to territory, that is, or reality itself. No actual entity metaphorically obtains as opposed to literally obtains. Territories are concrete realities or the simply are not, period.
In my view, then, "literal" describes how language is being used, not how an actual thing is or isn't obtaining. We should refrain from using "literal" as an attribute of actual entities, of territory, and reserve it for maps, or how langauge is being used. We SPEAK or DESCRIBE something literally or figuratively. But what we describe, the reality itself, is actual or not.
So to say "This is by blood" either speaks figuratively or literally. Spoken literally, it EQUATES the actual wine with the actual blood of Jesus, which is canabalism (even if sacred canabalism). Spoken figuratively, it LIKENS or COMPARES the wine to the blood of Jesus, which is symbolic. Both are reality-depicting. Each depicts a DIFFERENT reality. I view communion as an expression of the latter and involving NO equating of wine with blood at any time. Jesus' actual blood, the material stuff of the incarnate Christ, is nowhere present in Communion. It's pure symbol which, if celebrated in faith, bring the participant into an experience of the realities and benefits of Jesus' death and resurrection. After all, Jesus' "blood" is itself just a stand in for an EVENT--his violent death--not a SUBSTANCE at all.
Catholic doctrine holds the elements to be worthy of latria, 'worship', because Communion is a REPETITION of the EVENT, the actual body and blood of the Jesus being present. It is this understanding of Communion that I would disagree with. There is no REPETITION of the ONCE FOR ALL. There is only a symbolic form of invitation to believe in what happened in the past and so to experience the risen Christ--not to believe that what happened is happening again in the elements.
Tom
Post Edited (TGB) : 11/13/2006 10:21:11 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 11/13/2006 11:37 AM (GMT -6) | |
TGB said...
Catholic doctrine holds the elements to be worthy of latria, 'worship', because Communion is a REPETITION of the EVENT... It is this understanding of Communion that I would disagree with. There is no REPETITION of the ONCE FOR ALL.
POINT OF FACT... Catholic Dogma does *not* teach a "repetition" of the truly "once and for all" sacrifice of Christ! It does not. The Chrisitian Reformed Church has relegated to a mere historical footnote its confessional statement that the Roman Mass is a "damnable idolotry." They spent several years in discussion with the US Conference of Bishops!
Instead, we should use the accurate term "re-presentation." There is, was and will be ONLY ONE sacrifice of Christ, on Golgatha. In the Eucharist we can *participate* in that one sacrifice.
In no way is Christ sacrificed over and over again.
So, Tom, the US Conference of Bishops AGREES with you that there "is no repetition of the once for all!"
(o) | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 11/13/2006 11:42 AM (GMT -6) | | Here is a representative of the "spiritualized" notion of the Eucharist of Calvinists -- this is what my kids get in Sunday School.
75 ....
as surely as
I receive from the hand of the one who serves,
and taste with my mouth
the bread and cup of the Lord,
given me as sure signs of Christ's body and blood,
so surely
he nourishes and refreshes my soul for eternal life
with his crucified body and poured-out blood.
76 Q. What does it mean
to eat the crucified body of Christ
and to drink his poured-out blood?
A. It means
to accept with a believing heart
the entire suffering and death of Christ
and by believing
to receive forgiveness of sins and eternal life.^1
But it means more.
Through the Holy Spirit, who lives both in Christ and in us,
we are united more and more to Christ's blessed body.^2
And so, although he is in heaven^3 and we are on earth,
we are flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone.^4
And we forever live on and are governed by one Spirit,
as members of our body are by one soul.^5
^1 John 6:35, 40, 50-54
^2 John 6:55-56; 1 Cor. 12:13
^3 Acts 1:9-11; 1 Cor. 11:26; Col. 3:1
^4 1 Cor. 6:15-17; Eph. 5:29-30; 1 John 4:13
^5 John 6:56-58; 15:1-6; Eph. 4:15-16; 1 John 3:24
(o) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 11/13/2006 5:36 PM (GMT -6) | | Paragraph 1376 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
The Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring: "Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood.”
Catholics believe the Eucharist has a 'sacrificial' nature, that is, Christ is the SAME victim in the Eucharist as he was on the Cross. Inasmuch as there is the real presence of Christ in the elements, a sacrifice is offered to God, this sacrifice is propitiatory, and the consecrated elements should be venerated as the living Christ with the same adoration (latria) given God.
I won’t quibble over your substituting “re-presentation” for “repetition.” I think both terms, given the Catholic view, are horribly wrong. There is no sacrifice of Christ in the elements, no propitiation therein, and no adoration due the elements so-called transformed.
For the record, I had great fellowship with Catholic believers during my years in Lebanon and never butted heads over this issue. They have their view. I have mine. We didn’t make this a litmus test for fellowship. And I won’t do so here either. But I do think it a very misguided belief.
Tom
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 11/14/2006 9:06 AM (GMT -6) | | | I don't mean to stop the convo POW. Sorry to be so abrupt. But the gospel texts just don't, in my view, ground all that's been laid upon them. "As often as you do this you remember me." Memories DO 'represent' ('re-enact', 'repeat') the past. But only as a memory. There's no actual reoccurence of the event, nothing in the present that deserves the adoration and attention we give the original event--except for the Spirit's presence among us all.
But as for the elements and the Lord's Supper, it's a memory. But memories are powerful, and when a community remembers the SAME thing the SAME way and does so in one place, powerful social-dispositions are created and/or maintained. And when the remembering of some past event is accompanied by physical symbols of the event, or by reenactments that represent the event, more of our senses are invovled in remembering and the cohesive properties of corporate memories become even MORE powerful. But none of this requires anything like the Catholic or Orthodox views regarding the nature of the elements themselves. All that's needed is for the event to be brought powerfully before the minds of the community so that WHAT is remembered is clearly specified for all involved. When it's remembered, in faith, the spiritual benefits of the event are mediated by the living Chirst throught he Spirit to the Body. All of this can be had by a simple memorial understanding of the Lord's Supper.
Tom
Post Edited (TGB) : 11/14/2006 8:11:03 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 11/14/2006 5:33 PM (GMT -6) | | |
I'm in the "Middle West"--in Chicago--and I'm going to put forth an idea for Tom--who's been living in the Middle East. He's closer to the perspective I'm going to bring up; but then he's not a native!
Tom, you mentioned "remember." Two things a Swedish Lutheran mentions (in Touchstone Mag, Sept. 2004) in connection with the Church might apply: "The anamnestic and epicletic body of believers in the process of being transfigured in to the Body of Christ, realizing what it in essence already is--is that were the real Church is to be found?" (Obviously this quote has a context that I'll not bring along with it; but the two words are very good!) Looking at the words "epicletic" we recognize what happens through the work of the Holy Spirit that would not happen otherwise -- the Church has "epicletic" prayers for both the communion elements and for the reading of the Word. The first one though, which is "anamnestic" -- I think -- means "memory." And this one is not the way Tom seems to be using it, in his also American way (just as I'd naturally do).
Anamnesis -- "memory" means more to me because of two things: liturgy, and a certain scripture that is opened up to me having become familiar with its Middle Eastern theme liturgically. Orthodox, remembering" those who are "alive in the Lord" but abscent from us in the body sing a song that goes, "Memory Eternal." The Divine Liturgy has many, many compartments where the congregation all prays to God to "remember" those who must have his rest. These are very, very prominant elements in Orthodoxy. It is part of their recognition of body-life! Then, being finally a bit more aware of that, the passage at Golgatha where the repentant theif says "Remember me when you come into your kingdom." comes to mind. This theif was not just saying don't forget about me -- like the baker and cup bearer first forgot about Joseph. He was saying something like "See to it that I get rescued, 'cause I know you have the power."
And, so, we are asked to "remember" our Lord. That is more than this native Minnesotan used to think of it being. I think I remember you, Tom, explaining in even better fashion that I've attempted here, what the cultural richness of "memory" -- maybe you can help me. But memory is a joining. For us to "remember" Christ is to identify with his "name." To identify with him.
And THAT identification is not the thin notion of commercials; its more than that. Its an identification wrought, crafted, fashioned and perfected by the Holy Spirit.
At least that is what I think.
Thanks, Tom.
- B
(o) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 11/15/2006 9:08 AM (GMT -6) | | POW-
I remember (no pun there) our discussing “remember” as a key Old Testament ‘covenant’ term. Indeed it isn’t equivalent to just “not forgetting” in the cognitive sense. It’s far more like “engage your side of the contract.” “Remember me to so-and-so” means “make mention of me,” “make me part of your plans and purposes.”
I agreed with everything you said POW. Communion is THIS kind of remembering. It’s engaging in covenant. I’m just saying that the elements are nothing more than a symbolic device that facilitates the real engagement of faith in Christ. I can’t think of anything that engagement in Christ or conformity into his image means or should mean that requires the elements to be anything more that ‘symbol’.
-------------------
Zach: All language is metaphor. None is literal.
Tom: All language is ‘analogical’ yes, but not all language is ‘metaphor’. All some language is literal (viz., non-figurative). It’s just getting clear on our use of the term ‘literal’. Are we using it to describe the use of a ‘map’ or the nature of the ‘territory’ it describes. For my part, ‘literal’ is a ‘map’ term. It describes the USE of language. And so far as that goes, it is clearly the case that we use language both literally and figuratively (or metaphorically). It’s not ALL metaphor.
Zach: That being said, there is no literal sense in which the Christian is in Christ. This discussion truly is all semantics.
Tom: If it’s all semantics, then there’s no call for insisting that there can be no sense in which the believer is literally in Christ. One would have to define one’s terms and semantics and THEN say whether or not it is so. In other words, Zach, if ALL language is by definition metaphor and NONE is literal, then semantics would be uniformly unchanging and unaffected by context. A ‘word’ would only ever have ONE meaning it brought to ALL contexts. But this is obviously not the case. Semantics describes a living, diverse, flexible USE of language that is contextually driven and determined. A word can be used literally or figuratively.
Zach: First result from dictionary.com: met‧a‧phor—1. a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in “A mighty fortress is our God.”
Tom: This is why your “all language is metaphor; none is literal” can’t be true. Only some language is metaphor, specifically, those words/terms we USE in a figurative way to describe one thing “in terms of” another thing.
Zach: I could re-define "tuna fish" ad hoc and tell you that my enitre sofa is upholstered in tuna fish. But at this point my language is an impediment rather than a help in communication.
Tom: You could define items however you wish and they’d meaningfully ‘map’ the world of your experience FOR YOU. But as you note, language is a community affair. It mediates social dispositions and realities, so everybody has to agree on the ‘map’ if they’re to communicate.
I forgot what this was about! Oh yeah, the “bread” and “wine.” I’d agree with you Zach (I think). They’re just symbols. But they’re COMMUNITY symbols that are invested with meaning BY CHRIST and intentionally tied by him to the COMMUNITY’S repeated celebration of a historical event. So they’re not on the same level as “I am the Vine.” Linguistically, yeah, they are that sort of thing—metaphor. But Christ never took a “vine” from the field, linked it intentionally to the once and for all event of his death as a symbol of that event, and asked us to repeat it. So we’re out of language now and into the use and meaning of physical emblems as communal symbols.
Tom
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 11/15/2006 5:57 PM (GMT -6) | |
TGB said...
POW-
I remember (no pun there) our discussing “remember” as a key Old Testament ‘covenant’ term. Indeed it isn’t equivalent to just “not forgetting” in the cognitive sense. It’s far more like “engage your side of the contract.” “Remember me to so-and-so” means “make mention of me,” “make me part of your plans and purposes.”
I agreed with everything you said POW. Communion is THIS kind of remembering. It’s engaging in covenant. I’m just saying that the elements are nothing more than a symbolic device that facilitates the real engagement of faith in Christ. I can’t think of anything that engagement in Christ or conformity into his image means or should mean that requires the elements to be anything more that ‘symbol’. Thanks, Tom.
We'll find out in heaven...
I included, and you would too, that the benefit of Christ to us, by the Spirit, is body as well as soul. I won't say more than that. God takes care--so I trust--no matter.
Thanks again.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 9/5/2009 9:44 AM (GMT -6) | | amen, d.
One Love said...The Eucharist is a time when THIS happens... When I choose Christ, when I acknowledge my sin, I allow Christ and the truth about his atoning act to define my existence, that is, I recognize the truth that this act on my behalf is part of the ‘data’ (to use process catgories) that defines my actuality, my perspective on reality. And when that happens, Christ becomes part of my present reality, despair is healed, and I’m transformed. Christ personally self-disposes toward my and I self-dispose toward him. Then relational intimacy happens—that is, a real exchange of life, and exchange of thoughts, feelings, and desires. I share MY thoughts, feelings, and desires, I stand naked in the truth of who and what I am. But Christ does the SAME. He stands naked in the truth of his atoning act, the truth of who and what HE is. And part of the truth of who we are is the social-disposition. That is, the truth about Christ’s saving act ‘on my behalf’, justly offered as the authorized representative of all the members of the whole, becomes part of MY unique perspective and experience as I freely choose it.
Life is never the same.Communion is an OCCASION for receiving DIVINE GRACE unto THEOSIS (self-disposition through Holy Spirit empowerment unto the Dispositional Equilibrium)Communion is one of the MOST POWERFUL weapons that we have in this war against Satan. Communion is one of the MOST POWERFUL equipping stations for God's light-bearers. Communion is the heart of the Church. Goodness...
(o) | | Back to Top | | |
| 67 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:48 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|