Posted on

RESPONSE TO REASONS 3-5 (Eucharist)

The author writes,again italicized.
3. It does not take Christ literally enough (2)

In each of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) we have the institution of the Eucharist. When the wine is presented, Christ’s wording is a bit different. Here is how it goes in Luke’s Gospel: “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood” (Luk 22:20). Here, if we were really to take Christ literally, the “cup” is the new covenant. It is not the wine, it is the cup that is holy. However, of course, even Roman Catholics would agree that the cup is symbolic of the wine. But why one and not the other? Why can’t the wine be symbolic of his death if the cup can be symbolic of the wine? As well, is the cup actually the “new covenant”? That is what he says. “This cup . . . is the new covenant.” Is the cup the actual new covenant, or only symbolic of it? See the issues?
fancy64
Jesus takes the cup to share then says the following,”for I tell you [that] from this time on I shall not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” This is an important declaration. He tells them he will not drink the wine until the Kingdom of God comes so we look to see when He drinks this wine. It is when He is on the cross.
Anotherwords,the Passover is not complete,YET.
Let’s focus on the Eucharist again. The offering at Mass is the same as the offering at the Passover-bread and wine.
We have heard this before;the offering of the bread and wine by the priest Melchizedek

The cup is two things;it is part of the Seder Service. There are 4 cups. Second,it is a container.The Catechism of the Catholic Church* makes it clear that it is the bread and wine that is offered in the Mass that becomes the Sacred Body and Precious Blood of Our Lord. The chalice is merely a container – sanctified because of its use – the Precious Blood which is contained in it (together with the Sacred Body on the paten) is the New Covenant.
The author brings up the GOSPEL OF JOHN’S DISCOURSE ON THE BREAD OF LIFE and draws this conclusion:

“Why did they walk away? Because, like all other unbelievers, they expected something of Jesus that He did not come to provide and they misunderstood His teachings and intentions.

Jesus wasn’t speaking to unbelievers in the passage.The teaching was presented to HIS DISCIPLES. It’s why Jesus turned to the remaining and questioned them,””Do you also want to leave?”
There is a difference between the Synoptic Gospels and John’s Gospel.We’ll come back to John’s Gospel in a future entry. For now we take into account the following

St. John wrote for the third generation of Christians, who already knew the Synoptics and whose deeper theological learning enabled them to understand the more profound aspect of our Lord’s teaching as well as to detect the errors of heresy and false speculation. The Synoptists deal largely with our Lord’s life and teaching in Galilee; St. John concentrates on the happenings in Judea.
St. John’s account of the public ministry of Christ comprises three passovers (four if we include 5:1), the Synoptics speak of only one Pasch, the one during which the crucifixion took place. Since Christ’s ministry doubtless began several months before the first Pasch, it lasted – according to St. John’s Gospel – at least two years and a half (three years and a half if we include 5:1); according to the Synoptic scheme, on the other hand, it extended over only one year. St. John enumerates at least three pass overs:

“And the Pasch of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem” (2:13); “Now the Pasch, the festival day of the Jews, was near at hand” (6:4); “Jesus, therefore, six days before the Pasch, came to Bethania” (12:1).

Many scholars also refer to the Pasch the words found in 5:1: “After these things was a festival day of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.” Are we then in the presence of a contradiction between St. John and the Synoptists? We do not think so. The Synoptics are not exhaustive but at best fragmentary; they considerably abridge the Savour’s public life and condense its events. Furthermore, it is not a case of three witnesses against one, but of an early Synoptic tradition in contrast with the mature theme of St. John. It is to be also noted that the Synoptic account really supposes several Paschal solemnities during our Lord’s ministry (cf. Matthew 12:1; Mark 2:23; Luke 6:1).
Source: http://www.cathtruth.com/catholicbible/john.htm

Advertisements

About therasberrypalace

Catholic.conservative. Pro life.Period.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s