Every body faces the LORD JESUS ON THE EUCHARISTIC TABLE - whether in TLM of Novus Ordo the Lord is the Oriens of our Life.
Anonymous said...
father, di po ba yung 1970 missal sabi nun ad orientem dapat pero po option yung haharep ang pastor sa tao pag misa?
August 19, 2010 2:28 PM
Fr. Abe, CRS said...
Yes. But, when the Novus Ordo was implemented almost all priests and Bishops preferred facing both the Altar and the People.
The theology of Ad Orientem is that CHRIST IS THE ORIENS, THE LIGHT OF OUR LIFE. It is not the East that is the Light but JESUS THE LORD.
So, when our priest is celebrating the Mass HE IS FACING ON THE HOLY EUCHARIST BEFORE HIM. HE IS FACING AT CHRIST THE EUCHARISTIC LORD... THE ORIENS, THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD.
ACTUALLY BOTH PRIEST AND PEOPLE ARE FACING STILL THE HOLY EUCHARIST ON THE ALTAR TABLE DURING THE LITURGY OF THE EUCHARIST. WELL, DURING THE LITURGY OF THE WORD THE PRIEST IS PROCLAIMING TO THE PEOPLE THE WORD OF GOD AND THE CATHOLIC FAITH. Thus, it is but natural that he faced the people then because Kerygma is for the people.
When our priests are praying in the Church without the Holy Eucharist on the Table he is also facing the Altar with the People. So, in both case whether Tridentine Latin Mass or the Novus Ordo the Catholic priests are facing CHRIST THE ORIENS OF THE WORLD!
Ang problema sa mga bumabatikos sa Santa Iglesia hindi nila binubuksa ang isip nila sa tunay na mabubuting layunin ng Santo Papa hinggil sa Liturgy. They are twisting its real meaning to suit their defiance and rebellion.
August 19, 2010 3:58 PM
.jpg)
![ST. JEROME EMILIANI [1486-1537]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6dKQTchkJaA/R0lo013dyBI/AAAAAAAAB_4/XzUAPDESwwQ/s1600/St.+Jerome+in+prayer,+small_1.jpg)
Father Abe,
ReplyDeleteGood pm po,itatanong ko lang po kung ano ang ibig sabihin at kung ano ang sinisimbulo ng kandila,ng tubig,ng tinapay,ng alak at ng bibliya sa misa?Meron po bang isang larawan lamang o icon na tumutukoy sa lahat ng ito,kung meron po,saan ko ito pwedeng makita?THANK YOU PO AND MORE POWER?
Let me explain them one by one:
ReplyDeleteI. CANDLE
Job 29:3 "When his candle shined upon my head, and when by his light I walked through darkness"
In this passage Job is reminiscing the days when he was filled with God's blessings and grace. He uses the symbol of the candle to manifest the grace of God in his life. So, in our Catholic Mass the Candle also symbolizes the same Grace of God given to us through our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist.
Psalm 18:28 "For thou wilt light my candle: the LORD my God will enlighten my darkness."
Here David is expressing his Hope and Trust in the eternal love and mercy of God. That despite his sinfulness there will be salvation, sanctification from God who is our light in the Darkness. The presence of Candles in the Mass also expresses our Christian Hope and Trust in the Lord Jesus our Savior. Despite the presence of sin in our life we believe that God will enlighten our life. As St. Paul proclaims: "Where sin abounds the grace of God abounds all the more." [cf. Romans 5:20]
The absence of Candle symbolizes a life outside the grace of God and living in darkness according to Biblical perspective:
Job 21:17 How oft is the candle of the wicked put out! and how oft cometh their destruction upon them! God distributeth sorrows in his anger.
Proverbs 24:20 "For there shall be no reward to the evil man; the candle of the wicked shall be put out."
Jeremiah 25:10 Moreover I will take from them the voice of mirth, and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride, the sound of the millstones, and the light of the candle.
That is the reason why we keep Candles in our Altars and Sanctuaries and Tabernacles because it reminds us to remain faithful to God and continuesly exert to live a life of righteousness under His grace through the Holy Spirit.
We also exert effort to keep a burning candle or oil lamp in our Tabernacles to remind us that Jesus is the light of the World [cf. John 1:4-5] and that God is the light of our life [cf. 1 John 1:5]. Absence of light in the Tabernacle is Biblically a sign of being out of God's blessings:
Job 18:6 The light shall be dark in his tabernacle, and his candle shall be put out with him.
This is contrary to the Divine Command that there must be an Oil Lamp perpetually shining in the Holy of Holies of the Temple:
Exodus 27:20 And thou shalt command the children of Israel, that they bring thee pure oil olive beaten for the light, to cause the lamp to burn ALWAYS. [King James Version]
So, that practive of having a lamp in our Tabernacles is very Biblical.
In special Masses we also put THE SEVEN CANDELABRA:
Exodus 25:37 Make seven lamps for the lampstand and set them up so that they shine toward the front.
Every Mass of the Pope, for instance, we put the Seven Lampstands or the Seven Candlesticks.
Jesus also demands to his followers to give light to others like a candle shining in the house and giving light to every body:
Matthew 5:15 "Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house."
The Church is the House of God [cf. 1 Timothy 3:15]. Thus, we put light into it by imitating Christ who is the Light of the Church. The candles in the Church and on our altars reminds us of the admonition of the Lord to be a light to others. Like a city shining on a Hill:
Matthew 5:14 "Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid."
That City set on a Hill is the Church, the Communnity of Believers, they are shining forth with the Splendor of God. And indeed, the Catholic Church lighted the world in Sciences with her numerous scientists, in Education, in Arts [Michelangelo, Raphaelo, Leonardo], in Music [Mozart, Beethoven, Vivaldi] and in other fields such as Architecture and almost every field of human development.
II. THE HOLY WATER
ReplyDeleteThe presence of Water in the Temple of God and for religious purpose is very clear in the Bible. That is the reason why it is mind boggling why the enemies of the Catholic Faith failed to read and understand this thing from the Sacred Scriptures.
1. Water is the first element touched by the Spirit of God
Genesis 1:1-2 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And THE SPIRIT OF GOD MOVED UPON THE FACE OF THE WATERS.
Because of that blessing from the Holy Spirit it is water that gives life in the world. The places with water is beaming with life while those with little water is parched, deserted and barren.
2. The Blessing of Bread and Water in the Sinai Covenant Rituals
Exodus 23:25 "And ye shall serve the LORD your God, and he shall BLESS thy BREAD, and thy WATER; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee."
This is the reason why we bless our Bread. In the family it is the Father of the Family that blesses the food and in the Temple the priest is the one blessing the Bread.
The priest is also Blessing the Water because he is the Minister of God [cf. Exodus 28:1 KJV].
3. The HOLY WATER in Earthen Vessel
Numbers 5:17 "And the PRIEST shall take HOLY WATER in an earthen vessel..."
Thus, in our Churches we usually keep the HOly Water for Baptism and Blessing of People in a large Earthen Vessel ["Banga" in Filipino] or for the richer places even in Bronze, Silver or Golden containter.
See, WORD FOR WORD, DIRECTLY, CATEGORICALLY... THERE IS HOLY WATER IN THE BIBLE.
4. The People were being Sprinkled by the Holy Water to purify them
ReplyDeleteNumbers 8:6-7 "Take the Levites from among the children of Israel, and cleanse them. And thus shalt thou do unto them, to cleanse them: Sprinkle water of purifying upon them... so make themselves clean."
Actually v. 7 states that they should be shaved and cleaned thoroughly including the clothes. There is no need for us to do that because as Jesus said to Peter during the washing of the feet "there is no need of the bath the one who is clean already" [cf. John 13:10]. And so as the feet was enough for the Lord Jesus during the Washing of the Feet the sprinkling is enough for those who have been born in Water and in Spirit in Baptism. [cf. John 3:15]
That sprinkling is not only for the priests as mentioned in the Book of Numbers. It is also for all the believers of God:
Ezekiel 36:25 "Then will I SPRINKLE clean WATER upon you, and ye shall be CLEAN: from all your FILTHINESS, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you."
First, there will be SPRINKLING OF WATER in the future. What is that future? THE REIGN OF THE MESSIAH. And that water can make the believers of God clean. Primarily it refers to Baptism and secondarily to the rite of Sprinkling of Water in the Catholic Church. That is why when we are burdened with uncleanness we are askiing for the blessing of the Holy Water from our priests.
Actually the Rite of Sprinkling is very very old practive among the believers of God and it is a cherished sacramental:
Numbers 19:13 Whosoever toucheth the dead body of any man that is dead, and purifieth not himself, defileth the tabernacle of the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from Israel: because the WATER of separation was not SPRINKLED upon him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is yet upon him.
Numbers 19:17 And for an unclean person they shall take of the ashes of the burnt heifer of purification for sin, and running WATER shall be put thereto in a vessel:
Num 19:18 And a clean person shall take hyssop, and dip it in the water, and sprinkle it upon the tent, and upon all the vessels, and upon the persons that were there, and upon him that touched a bone, or one slain, or one dead, or a grave:
Num 19:19 And the clean person shall sprinkle upon the unclean on the third day, and on the seventh day: and on the seventh day he shall purify himself, and wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and shall be clean at even.
5. The Prophet Elisha as a Man of God blessed the water with Salt and made it an element of life for the people:
2 Kings 2:19-21 And the men of the city said unto Elisha, Behold, I pray thee, the situation of this city is pleasant, as my lord seeth: but the water is naught, and the ground barren. And he said, Bring me a new cruse, and put salt therein. And they brought it to him. And he went forth unto the spring of the waters, and cast the salt in there, and said, Thus saith the LORD, I have healed these waters; there shall not be from thence any more death or barren land.
This is exactly what our Bishops and Priests are doing in Blessing the Holy Water. The Priest blesses the Salt and the Water in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit so that it becomes a reminder of our Baptism and a powerful instrument against diabolical presence. In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity he exorcises the water and the salt and mixed them together. It is now then a HOly Water, a Blessed Water, an Exorcise Water against the evil spirits.
6. Water is the Symbol of Baptism by which God saved through Water:
ReplyDelete1 Peter 3:20 "These were the spirits of those who had not obeyed God when he waited patiently during the days that Noah was building his boat. The few people in the boat---eight in all---were SAVED BY THE WATER, which was a SYMBOL POINTING TO BAPTISM, which now saves you. It is not the washing off of bodily dirt, but the promise made to God from a good conscience. It saves you through the resurrection of Jesus Christ"
7. The Holy Water reminds us that Jesus is the Water of Life and that the Water that He gives is the Holy Spirit:
John 4:13-14 "Jesus answered, "Those who drink this water will get thirsty again, but those who drink the water that I will give them will never be thirsty again. The water that I will give them will become in them a spring which will provide them with life-giving water and give them eternal life."
THE PRESENCE OF WATER IN THE BIBLE FROM GENESIS TO REVELATION IS VERY CLEAR NOT ONLY FOR PRACTICAL PURPOSE SUCH AS DRINKING AND WASHING. IT HAS RELIGIOUS SIGNIFICATION. IT WAS USED FOR RITUALS AND RELIGIOUS WORSHIP OF GOD. IT WAS ALSO USED BY PROPHETS TO PURIFY NOT ONLY MATERIAL IMPURITIES BUT EVEN SPIRITUAL ONES.
Water were used religiously for cleansing, purifying and healing as in the water of Siloam:
John 9:7 "And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing."
The Temple has a large Bronze container of large water:
1 Kings 7:23 And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.
AND THUS, THE BOOK OF REVELATION ENDED WITH WATER FLOWING FROM THE VERY THRONE OF GOD. IT SYMBOLIZES THE GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, THE GRACES AND THE VIRTUES BEING GIVEN TO THE FAITHFUL OF GOD:
Revelation 22:1 "And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb."
The image of water shows the presence and the triumph of God in Heaven. The Temple has a large basin of Water to manifest the presence of God on Israel. The priests blesses and sprinkles Holy Water to show the power and victory of God against sin and impurities and we have Holy Water in our Churches to manifest that the Church is the presence of God not only on Israel but on the whole human race... At the end God shall be all in all [cf. 1 Corinthians 15:27-28]... He purifies us by His grace through the water that He blessed proclaiming the Victory of the Messiah over impurities, Uncleanness and the Malevolent Spirits.
III. THE HOLY BREAD AND WINE
ReplyDelete1. The Sacrifice Melchizedek
Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth BREAD and WINE: and he was the PRIEST of the most high God.
See, from the Book of Genesis the Priest of God was already offering BREAD AND WINE. Very Catholic isn't it? It is all the more meaningful because the Priesthood of Jesus is of THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK:
Psalm 110:4 The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek. [cf. Heb 5:6/6:20/7:17,21]
When did Jesus perform His priesthood according to the Order of Melchizedek?
* During the Last Supper when he offered and blessed the BREAD [Luke 22:19] and the WINE [Luke 22:18/ Matthew 26:29 KJV; Psalm 116:13 GNB]!
* When He commanded the Apostles to ‘DO’ the same action, He consecrated them as priests of the Order of Melchizedek.
2. The Showbread in the Sinai Covenant
Exodus 25:30 And thou shalt set upon the table showbread before Me always.
So, the Catholic Church sets a Table with Bread as ordered by God to Moses and ordered by Jesus to His Apostles.
Exodus 35:13 The table, and his staves, and all his vessels, and the showbread. [Ex 39:36]
Numbers 4:7 Upon the table of showbread they shall spread a cloth of blue.
1 Samuel 21:5 The showbread was sanctified in the vessel
That is why the hosts of bread are blessed in the vessels for liturgical worship.
1 Samuel 21:4,6 The showbread is holy [It is hallowed bread]. This bread is reserved for priests. David was given it only during emergency case [Mt 12:4/Mk 2:26/Lk 6:4]
SO, THERE IS A HOLY BREAD IN THE BIBLE!
Matthew 12:4 [Douay-Rheims Bible] "He went into the house of God, and then they ate THE SACRED LOAVES of bread that only priests are supposed to eat."
The Good News Bible translated it as "Bread offered to God" and the English Standard Version as "Bread of Presence".
All these are present in the Holy Bread given by Jesus to His Apostles and for which He asked them to repeat the Last Supper:
* The Eucharistic Bread is the Bread of Presence of Jesus because it is His own Body.
* The Eucharistic Bread is the Bread offered to God in Thanksgiving [in Greek: Eucharisteo"]
1 Kings 7:48 The showbread on the altar and table of gold. [1 Chron 28:16/ 2 Chron 4:19/Rev 8:3-5/9:13 for Altar of God in Heaven]
In richer countries the Eucharistic Table are truly golden Altar Tables. That is Biblical.
1 Chronicles 23:29 …for the showbread, for fine flour... for unleavened cakes
Our Catholic Bread in the Mass is truly Unleavened. Those of the Born Again are Skyflakes and other FAKES. Ha, ha, ha...
2 Chronicle 2:4 Continual showbread for the Lord is an ordinance forever
OF COURSE, THAT IS WHY JESUS CONTINUED IT. HE ORDERED THE APOSTLE TO CONTINUE BLESSING THE HOLY BREAD AS HE DID DURING THE LAST SUPPER.
2 Chronicles 13:11 Showbread set on the ‘pure table’ [2 Chron 29:18]
Hebrews 9:2 The Tabernacle made of candelabra, the table, the showbread – this is called The Sanctuary.
VERY CATHOLIC. WE HAVE THE CANDELABRAS, THE TABLE AND THE SHOWBREAD. HE, HE, HE...
3. The Feast of Passover Sacrifice
ReplyDeleteEx 12:11 …It is the Lord’s Passover. [Lev 23:5/Num 9:2-5]
Ex 12:14 And this day shall be unto you for a memorial [zikkaron]; and ye shall keep it a feast to the Lord throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever. [The Passover Sacrifice is a perpetual feast]
The Last Supper is the Feast of Passover Sacrifice [Mt 26:1-2,19/Mk 14:1,12/Lk 22:1,7]
1 Cor 5:7 Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us.
4. The Feast of Unleavened Bread
Exodus 12:17 And you shall observe the feast of unleavened bread… therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance for ever. [The Feast of Unleavened Bread is Perpetual by Divine Decree]
The Last Supper is the Feast of Unleavened Bread:
Mark 14:1 After two days was the feast of the Passover, and of unleavened bread… [Lk 22:1]
Mk 14:12 And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the Passover, his disciples said unto Him, Where wilt Thou that we go and prepare that Thou mayest eat the Passover? [Lk 22:7]
5. The Bread from Heaven [The Manna]
Exodus 16:15 The Manna. Moses said unto them, This is the bread which the Lord hath given you to eat. [Jn 6:31]
Ps 78:24-25 Manna as Food of Angels [‘The Eucharist is the real FOOD OF ANGELS’- Jn 6:48-51]
6. The Chalice or Cup of Salvation
ReplyDeletePsalm 116:12-13 [Douay-Rheims Bible] "What shall I render to the Lord, for all the things that he hath rendered to me? I will take THE CHALICE OF SALVATION; and I will call upon the name of the Lord." [cf. 1 Cor 10:16-17,21]
ONLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAS THE CUP OF SALVATION BEING RAISED DURING WORSHIP. How come it is called Cup or Chalice of Salvation? Because it contains the BLOOD OF JESUS:
Matthew 26:27 [DRB] "And taking the chalice, he gave thanks and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. For THIS IS MY BLOOD of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins."
7. The Bread and Wine in the House of Wisdom
Proverb 9:1,5 Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars… Come, eat of my bread, and drink of the wine which I have mingled.
Of course, this is expressing that if a person loves Wisdom his life will improve and he will be blessed.
However, we should also bear in mind that Jesus is the True Man of Wisdom greater than Solomon. He is the Truth [cf. John 14:6]. As a Man of Wisdowm He built a House that is the Church [cf. Matthew 16:18-19 and 1 Timothy 3:15] and He gave us His own Body as the Bread of Life.
8. The House of Bread
Bethlehem is called House of Bread. Why? Because it housed the Bread of Life – Jesus Himself!
9. The Fine Flour & Wine of the Temple
Leviticus 24:5-8 Fine Flour for the Memorial Bread, to be set on ‘pure table’ to be eaten in the holy place for it is most holy to the Lord among the offerings. It is a perpetual statute of an everlasting Covenant.
Imagine, way back in the Old Testament there was already a MEMORIAL BREAD. But Jesus gave us a new Memorial Bread... His own Body... The Eucharistic Bread which He called: "THIS IS MY BODY"... "DO THIS IN MEMORY OF ME"... THAT IS WHY THE TRUE MEMORIAL BREAD IS THE HOLY EUCHARIST.
1 Chron 9:29 Fine Flour and Wine in the House of God
1 Chron 23:29 Fine Flour for Unleavened Cakes
10. The Bread for Priestly Ordination
Leviticus 8:31 …there eat it & the BREAD that is in the basket of ORDINATION OFFERINGS, as I commanded…[RSV-CE] (‘Basket of Consecration’ – KJV)
Leviticus 21:8 Thou shalt sanctify him [priest], for he offereth the BREAD OF THY GOD: he shall be holy unto thee; for I the LORD, which sanctify you, am holy.
THE HOLY BREAD AND WINE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
ReplyDelete1. THE LAST SUPPER NARRATIVES: Mt 26:26-28/ Mk 14;1-24/ Lk 22:1-20/ 1 Cor 11:17-29 The Lord instituted the Holy Eucharist during His Last Supper in which He gave His Body and Blood in the form of Consecrated Bread and Wine.
2. The Sacrificial Nature of Last Supper Meal
Mt 26:28 [NLT] …It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive sins.
Mk 14:24 [NLT] …It is poured out as a sacrifice for many.
Lk 22:20 [NLT] …which is poured out as a sacrifice for you.
3. The Emmaus Experience
Lk 24:30-35 The Disciples recognized the Risen Lord in the Breaking of the Bread
4. The Miracle of Multiplication of Loaves
Jn 6:4,11-14 - on the eve of the Passover, Jesus performs The Miracle of Multiplying the Loaves. This was prophesied in the Old Testament (e.g., 2 Kgs 4:43), and foreshadows The Bread of Life.
Mt 14:19, 15:36; Mk 6:41, 8:6; Lk 9:16 - The Miracles of Multiplication of the Bread
Mt 16:12 - Jesus explains His metaphorical use of the term "bread." In Jn 6, He eliminates any metaphorical possibilities.
5. The Breaking of the Bread in Apostolic Church
Acts 2:42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostle’s doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
Acts 20:7 And upon the first day of the week [Sunday], when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them…
6. THE BREAD OF LIFE DISCOURSE
ReplyDeleteJn 6:35,41,48,51 - Jesus says four times "I AM the bread from heaven." It is He, Himself, the eternal bread from heaven.
Jn 6:27,31,49 - There is a parallel between the manna in the desert which was physically consumed, and this "new" bread which must be consumed.
Jn 6:51-52- Jesus says that the bread He is referring to is His flesh. The Jews take Him literally and immediately question ‘how can this man give us His flesh to eat?’
Jn 6:53-58 - Jesus does not correct their literal interpretation. Instead, he eliminates any metaphorical interpretations. In fact, Jesus says 4x we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Catholics thus believe that Jesus makes present His body and blood in the sacrifice of the Mass. Protestants can only argue that Jesus was speaking symbolically.
Jn 6:23-53 - A symbolic interpretation is not plausible. The Greek text uses the word "phago" 9x. "Phago" literally means "to eat" or "physically consume." Like the Protestants of our day, the disciples take issue with Jesus' literal usage of "eat." So Jesus does what?
Jn 6:54, 56, 57, 58 - He uses an even more literal verb "trogo," (to gnaw or chew or crunch). He stresses the literal meaning. The word “trogo” is only used two other times in the New Testament (in Mt 24:38 and Jn 13:18) and it always means to literally gnaw or chew meat. While “phago” might also have a spiritual application, "trogo" is never used metaphorically in Greek. So Protestants cannot find one verse in Scripture where "trogo" is used symbolically. The Jews already knew Jesus was speaking literally even before Jesus used “trogo” when they said “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” (Jn 6:52).
Jn 6:55 - to clarify further, Jesus says "For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed." This phrase can only be understood as being responsive to those who do not believe that Jesus' flesh is food indeed, and His blood is drink indeed. Further, Jesus uses the word "sarx." "Sarx" means flesh (not "soma" which means body). See, for example, Jn 1:13,14; 3:6; 8:15; 17:2; Mt 16:17; 19:5; 24:22; 26:41; Mk 10:8; 13:20; 14:38; and Lk 3:6; 24:39 which provides other examples in Scripture where "sarx" means flesh. It is always literal.
ReplyDeleteJn 6:55 - further, the phrases "real" food and "real" drink use the word "alethes." "Alethes" means "really" or "truly," and would only be used if there were doubts concerning the reality of Jesus' flesh and blood as being food and drink. Thus, Jesus is emphasizing the miracle of His body and blood being actual food and drink.
Jn 6:60 - as are many anti-Catholics today, Jesus' disciples are scandalized by these words. They even ask, "Who can 'listen' to it (much less understand it)?" To the unillumined mind, it seems grotesque.
Jn 6:61-63 - Jesus acknowledges their disgust. Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" means the disciples need supernatural faith, not logic, to understand His words.
Jn 3:6 - Jesus often used the comparison of "spirit vs. flesh" to teach about the necessity of possessing supernatural faith versus a natural understanding. In Mk 14:38 Jesus also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. We must go beyond the natural to understand the supernatural. In 1 Cor. 2:14, 3:3; Rom 8:5; and Gal 5:17, Paul also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison to teach that unspiritual people are not receiving the gift of faith. They are still "in the flesh."
Jn 6:63 - Protestants often argue that Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" shows that Jesus was only speaking symbolically. However, Protestants must explain why there is not one place in Scripture where "spirit" means "symbolic." As we have seen, the use of "spirit" relates to supernatural faith. What words are spirit and life? The words that we must eat Jesus' flesh and drink His blood, or we have no life in us.
Jn 6:66 - Many disciples left Jesus, as the Anti-Eucharist are rejecting this literal interpretation that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. At this point, these disciples really thought Jesus had lost His mind. If they were wrong about the literal interpretation, why wouldn't Jesus, the Great Teacher, have corrected them? Why didn't Jesus say, "Hey, come back here, I was only speaking symbolically!"? because they understood correctly. THE NUMBER OF THE DEVIL FITS THE CHAPTER AND VERSE OF THE PASSAGE REFERRING TO THOSE WHO REJECT THE HOLY EUCHARISTS [Cf. Rev 13:18]
ReplyDeleteMk 4:34 - Jesus always explained to His disciples the real meanings of His teachings. He never would have let them go away with a false impression, most especially in question about eternal salvation.
Jn 6:37 - Jesus says He would not drive those away from Him. They understood Him correctly but would not believe.
Jn 3:5,11; Mt 16:11-12 - Some examples of Jesus correcting wrong impressions of His teaching.
Jn 6:64,70 - Jesus ties the disbelief in the Real Presence of His Body and Blood in the Eucharist to Judas' betrayal. Those who don't believe in this miracle betray Him.
Ps 27:2; Is 9:20; 49:26; Mic 3:3; 2 Sam 23:17; Rev 16:6; 17:6, 16 - to further dispense with the Protestant claim that Jesus was only speaking symbolically, these verses demonstrate that symbolically eating body and blood is always used in a negative context of a physical assault. It always means “destroying an enemy,” not becoming intimately close with him. Thus, if Jesus were speaking symbolically in Jn 6:51-58, He would be saying to us, "He who reviles or assaults me has eternal life." This is absurd.
Jn 10:7 - Protestants point out that Jesus did speak metaphorically about Himself in other places in Scripture. For example, here Jesus says, "I am the door." But in this case, no one asked Jesus if He was literally made of wood. They understood him metaphorically.
ReplyDeleteJn 15:1,5 – When Jesus says, "I am the vine." Again, no one asked Jesus if He was literally a vine. In Jn 6, Jesus' disciples did ask about His literal speech (that this bread was His flesh which must be eaten). He confirmed the Transubstantiation.
Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25; Lk 22:18 – Jesus says He will not drink of the “fruit of the vine” until He drinks it new in the kingdom. Some Protestants try to use this verse (because Jesus said “fruit of the vine”) to prove the wine cannot be His blood. But the Greek word for fruit is “genneema” which literally means “that which is generated from the vine.” In Jn 15:1,5 Jesus says “I am the vine.” So “fruit of the vine” can also mean Jesus’ blood. In 1 Cor 11:26-27, Paul also used “bread” and “the body of the Lord” interchangeably in the same sentence. Also, see Mt 3:7;12:34;23:33 for examples were “genneema” means “birth” or “generation.”
Rom 14:14-18; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 1 Tim 4:3 – Protestants often argue that drinking blood and eating certain sacrificed meats were prohibited in the New Testament, so Jesus would have never commanded us to consume His body and blood. But these verses prove them wrong, showing that Paul taught all foods, even meat offered to idols, strangled, or with blood, could be consumed by the Christian if it didn’t bother the brother’s conscience and were consumed with thanksgiving to God.
John 6 ‘Bread of Life Discourse’ A METAPHOR?
ReplyDeleteThe big problem with the "metaphor explanation" is that those putting it forth forget that to "eat the body" and "drink the blood" were already figures of speech in Jesus’ culture. It meant to revile, or harm/attack:
Ps 27:2 When the wicked, even mine enemies and my foes, came upon me to eat up my flesh, they stumbled and fell. (KJV)
Dan 3:8 Wherefore at that time certain Chaldeans came near, and accused the Jews. (KJV) [Strong’s definition: accuse, devour, eat; of word: to eat the morsels of any one, to chew him up]
Dan 6:24 And the king commanded, and they brought those men which had accused Daniel (KJV) [see note above]
Mic 3:2-3 Who hate the good, and love the evil; who pluck off their skin from off them, and their flesh from off their bones; Who also eat the flesh of my people, and flay their skin from off them; and they break their bones, and chop them in pieces, as for the pot, and as flesh within the caldron. (KJV)
Rev 17:16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. (KJV)
The crowd took Jesus literally, because using this language in this culture, it couldn’t have been a metaphor. Because in their language, interpreting it as a metaphor (harm/attack) makes no sense. It would change the meaning of Jn 6:53 to something like "Verily, verily I say unto you, except you attack the Son of man and harm him, ye have no life in you. Whoso reviles me and curses me hath eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day".
If He was trying to introduce some new metaphor that was different from the one currently used by the Jews of the time without telling them, then it is suggesting our Lord was being deceptive. By "forcing" this new metaphor on Jesus’ words, you are therefore suggesting that He let the crowd leave Him and go off to eternal damnation (Mt 10:33) over a misunderstanding.
You'll also have to explain why Jesus becomes more graphic with the term, "Eat My Flesh". Here is a breakdown of the verbs used in the discourse: -trogo = chew, gnaw, as and animal eats. –phago = to eat, consume food.
V. 49 “Your fathers ate [ephagon] manna in the desert and they died”
V. 50 “… that a person may eat [phage] it and not die”
V. 51 “Anyone who eats [phagon] this bread will live for ever…”
V. 52 “How can this man give us his flesh to eat [phagein]?”
V. 53 “If you do not eat [phagethe] the flesh of the Son of man…”
V. 54 “Anyone who does eat [trogon] my flesh and drink my blood has eternal life…”
V. 56 “Whoever eats [trogon] my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me…”
V. 57 “whoever eats [trogon] me will also draw life from me..”
V. 58 “...it is not like the bread our ancestors ate [ephagon]…” “but anyone who eats [trogon] this bread will live forever.”
THE TESTIMONY OF ST. PAUL:
The Eucharist is THE LORD’S SUPPER
1 Cor 11:20 ‘When you meet together, it is not the Lord’s Supper that you eat’ [St. Paul castigating the Christians of Corinth for profaning the Lord’s Supper and this is what the Born Again are doing. They are eating Biscuits and Juices then after the gathering they discard them.]
The Cup of Blessing & ‘COMMUNION’
1 Cor 10:16 ‘The Cup of Blessing which we bless, is it not the Communion of the Blood of Christ? The Bread which we break, is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ?’
Ecclesial Unity through the Eucharistic Bread
Dear Father,
ReplyDeleteTanong lang po tungkol sa Nuvos Ordo at Traditional Latin Mass.During the Lords Prayer,ang pag holding hands ba ng mga kamay ng mga tao ay isa sa halimbawa ng abuso sa panahon ng holly mass? Ok lang ba ito? tapos kumg maraming abuso sa Nuvos Ordo, sa TLM may abuso din ba o wala talaga?
Sa Our Father ng Novus Ordo Mass ang holding hands ay hindi opisyal na nakasaad na dapat gawin ng mga tao. Sila ay dapat na nakatikom ang mga kamay samantalang ang pari ay nakalahad ang mga palad.
ReplyDeleteGayon pa man ang holding hands during Our Father iis not a liturgical abuse. Ito ay isang pious act that developed in the life of the Philippine Church during our people's darkest moments during the Martial Law and the miraculous Liberation given by God through Our Lady of Peace in EDSA Revolution. It became a pious tradition in our country to hold hands during Our Father to express our common desire for Unity, for Peace and for Harmony in the Society.
Kahit na hindi ito itinakdang liturgcal act for Our Father ito ay hindi masama. Actually ito ay mabuti.
Dapat nating tandaan na sa bawat kasaysayan ng iba't-ibang orders o culture in the history of the Church from time to time merong mga nadedevelop na particular liturgical tradition in these groups. Kaya nga may liturgical tradition ang mga Benedictines, Dominicans, Francsicans, etc. There are some variations but these variations are not seen as negative or bad but a pious liturgical tradition in harmony with the liturgical spirit.
Kaya hindi natin dapat masamain ang hindi naman masama. Hindi lahat ng bagay na hindi sinasaad ng Ordo ay masama na o maituturing nang liturgical abuse. SUBALIT, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE I ADMONISH OUR FAITHFUL TO BE FAITHFUL TO THE OFFICIAL RITE BECAUSE LITURGICAL ABUSES DO CAME OUT FROM OUR REPEATED ACTS OF REFUSING TO FOLLOW THE LITURGICAL NORMS AND TEXTS OF THE CHURCH.
May liturgical abuses din ba sa TLM?
YES. THERE IS AND THERE WERE.
First, it is being abused by people who are not in communion with the See of Peter such as the SSPX and the Sedevacantists.
Second, because of prolonged silence many churchgoers were forgetting the consecration of Jesus and instead reciting the rosary right at the most sacred part of the Mass. Some are reciting Novenas.
Third, due to long silence especially during the Canon the priests are silently reciting the long prayers. Then, nobody except God and the priest can know if they are really reading the texts and the prayers correctly and properly. Almost all of the TLM celebrants recites the Canon rather very fast. Unlike in Novus Ordo that the priest must read them in a coherent, modulated voice understandable to the Bible. In TLM the priest can do a marathon reading like a jet with no one complaining. Thus, there were accusations of impropriety using the liturgcial texts as if they are magical formula.
COURSE THE TLM IS A VERY ELABORATE AND BEAUTIFUL MASS AND THE NOVUS ORDO A VERY SIMPLE AND ALSO BEAUTIFUL MASS. BOTH OF THEM MUST BE CELEBRATED APPROPRIATELY. BOTH ARE VALID CELEBRATIONS OF THE SAME ETERNAL SACRIFICE OF CHRIST.
I noticed that some Liturgists prohibits putting candles on the altar they just preferred to put on the floor it's because their reason is the face of the priest is cannot be seen, while some diocese and Archdiocese esp. in Cebu Metropolitan Cathedral and in Rome and some Catholic Churches in US they place 6-7 candles on the the altar.
ReplyDeleteThe question is why are we there? to stare at the priest or to focus our eyes to the Lord?
Keb,
ReplyDeleteFor the "versus populum" altar, it is proper to place the crucifix (it should be prominent; therefore, it should not be small) at the center so that the priest is all the time oriented to it when he celebrates the Mass. If the priest should at all times be oriented to it, then, it follows that the crucifix should be facing him and not the people. Unless there is a crucifix which has two corpuses; one facing the priest while the other is facing the people (See EWTN Mass).
There should be at least two candles, one at the right and the other at the left of the crucifix. For High Mass, it should be six candles. For a Pontifical Mass, if the celebrant is the ordinary of the diocese, there should be 7 candles.
If you do all the above in a "versus populum" altar, naturally, the cross and the candles would block the vision of the people on the priest or the host during the elevation. But it is fine with me. You are right, we are not there to look at each other.
This problem would not arise if we go back to the old custom of the altar attached to the wall and the priest and people praying together in the same direction.
ACTUALLY IT IS NOT A PROBLEM. ONLY THE LIMITED MIND O PEOPLE WHO REFUSES TO UNDERSTAND CREATE THE ALLEGED PROBLEM.
ReplyDeleteYeah, padre, a "versus populum" altar is fine with me as long as a prominent crucifix is placed at the center, not at the side, of the altar - the now so called "Benedictine Arrangement".
ReplyDeleteJust the same, I prefer the Mass where the priest and people are in the same direction in liturgical worship. It solves all the confusion such as:
1. Why kneel in the elevation after each of the consecrations and not in the minor elevation in the doxology concluding the Eucharistic Prayer wherein in both instances the consecrated host and the chalice are exposed to the faithful's view? In the mass "facing the wall", the faithful kneel during the elevation for the exposition of the consecrated host and wine. They kneel because they will be in a face-to-face encounter with the Lord. They do not kneel in the doxology because there is only minor elevation and the host and chalice are not exposed to the view of the faithful.
2. In the words of consecration, many, if not most, Catholics think that they are the ones being addressed in "take this all of YOU and eat... and drink" precisely because many priests at this point hold and extend the host and chalice to the people while saying the words of consecration as if offering to them the host and the chalice. In the mass "facing the wall" this is not possible and it is clear that these words are not intended for the faithful gathered. they are prayers for the consecration of the gifts.
3. The confusion in the subject of the bowing. Many, if not most, Catholics think that when ministers bow on the other side of the altar, they are bowing to the people just as actors do on stage. They do not realize that we don't bow to each other, we bow to the altar. This confusion is absent in the mass "facing the wall." There is no way that the bowing to the altar be misinterpreted as bowing to the people.
These are just a few of my observations as a layperson, padre. Many, if not most, of us lay people are confused. Even lectors and extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are confused too. I know many of them. Perhaps one factor is that priests failed to teach us liturgical catechism. BUt, these confusions could have been avoided if we retained the mass "ad orientem", where the priest and faithful pray in the same direction. I think it is about time to return to the way it was.