View Single Post
Old Nov 27, 2004 | 06:33 AM
  #7  
George Knighton's Avatar
George Knighton
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,715
Likes: 1
From: Virginia (Besieged)
Default

Originally Posted by CivicSiRacer
He was using symbolism though. It wasn't "actually" his body and blood. Some religions use actual wine and some use grape juice.
Yes, he was using symbolism, but it was still a real representation of the sacrifice. To focus on and use the word symbolism might appear to debase the sacrament to real Christians. At the moment of consecration, the Holy Spirit is a part of the sacrament, and you are actually paricipating in the same sacrament that Christ gave.

This is a part of the original Church of the seven councils. To claim otherwise is heresy to the original churches.

When I say something is this or that, I am referring to orthodox Christianity, the Christianity of the Orthodox Church and the Anglican/Episcopal Church. Most of the particulars of the sacrament of communion are also adhered to by the church that calls itself the Roman Catholic Church.

You are free to believe what you want, of course, but we should both be careful about saying something is this or that without making ourselves clear. I apologise for anything I said that might have appeared like the furthering of a particular ideology.

The original poster asked if Christ really partook of the sacrament, and all Christian churches would agree that the Human part of Christ did partake of the same sacrament.

That God shed his own blood for our salvation is a part of the ultimate mystery of Christianity.

...this is my blood of the new sacrifice, which for you and for many is shed.
Reply