[otomik]

the doctrine of transubstantiation is at odds with vegetarianism. and if the blood of christ is some kind of exception it trivializes and belittles faith.

catholic vegetarianism: no such thing technically. the category doesn't fit exactly.

do include details of the catholics persecuting vegan cathari, it's an interesting tangent.

pope john paul II's favorite saint is Francis of Assisi, and you might guess he spoke about animals and their souls on more than one occasion.

This post has been edited by otomik: 26 April 2008 - 03:13 AM

[MRSSHF]

otomik said:

the doctrine of transubstantiation is at odds with vegetarianism. and if the blood of christ is some kind of exception it trivializes and belittles faith.

What?!?!?!

I'm Catholic and Vegan, and I think you may be misunderstanding the Doctrine.

[otomik]

MRSSHF said:

What?!?!?!

I'm Catholic and Vegan, and I think you may be misunderstanding the Doctrine.

actually no, i grew up catholic, was an altar boy. for the orthodox roman catholic faithful every week there is a miracle performed where the eucharist and wine literally becomes the flesh of christ.

http://en.wikipedia....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation
send this to the heap if you're not convinced.

surprise, you are not veg*n.

This post has been edited by otomik: 26 April 2008 - 10:36 AM

[MRSSHF]

otomik said:

actually no, i grew up catholic, was an altar boy. for the orthodox roman catholic faithful every week there is a miracle performed where the eucharist and wine literally becomes the flesh of christ.

http://en.wikipedia....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation
send this to the heap if you're not convinced.

surprise, you are not veg*n.

Well, actually it isn't LITERAL. The Eucharist is SUBSTANTIALLY changed from Bread to the Body of Christ. It means the bread BECOMES CHRIST. It does not mean the bread turns into God Meat. It's a fine distinction but an important one.

[rabid_child]

MRSSHF said:

Well, actually it isn't LITERAL. The Eucharist is SUBSTANTIALLY changed from Bread to the Body of Christ. It means the bread BECOMES CHRIST. It does not mean the bread turns into God Meat. It's a fine distinction but an important one.

I was raised Catholic and it's one of the few branches of Christianity (Eastern Orthodox I think is the other) that believes in literal transubstantiation . That is to say, other branches of Christianity believe that it is a representation of the body/blood of Christ. Catholics believe it IS the body and blood of Christ... it just still looks like bread. That isn't to say it becomes "God Meat" -- it is that it is more than a mere representation of the body of Christ -- something in the Eucharist has changed and it is no longer mere wafer.

Of course, having been raised "Catholic Lite" I always believed it to be representational. (In fact I was surprised too to find out that I was "supposed to" believe it was literal) That said, I don't think there's anything wrong about taking communion.

This post has been edited by rabid_child: 26 April 2008 - 02:38 PM

[Rincewind]

Yes, but it's still veg*n, because it doesn't ACTUALLY turn into the body and blood of a jewish zombie...People just thingk it does. I could say this tea I'm sipping at this moment is actually human blood, but I would still be a vegetarian, because it's not, really.

[troub]

I don't know about the Roman Catholic church, but as for Eastern Orthodox:

Quote

According to St. Nicholas Cabasilas, a medieval Orthodox teacher, the Church's understanding of the Eucharist is, as follows: In the first place, the sacrifice is not only an enactment or a symbol, but a real sacrifice. In the second, that which is sacrificed is not bread, but the very Body of Christ. In the third place, the Lamb of God was immolated only once and for all times. The Eucharist sacrifice consists not of the real or blood sacrifice of the Lamb, but in the transformation of bread into the sacrificed Lamb [Commentary on the Divine Liturgy, 32].

[Bof]

I watched the Vicar of Dibley episode recently where Geraldine is talking about some new, low fat communion wafers called 'I Can't Believe It's Not Jesus.' :)

[otomik]

Rincewind said:

Yes, but it's still veg*n, because it doesn't ACTUALLY turn into the body and blood of a jewish zombie.

yeah but If I consume the eucharist and I really believe it is the body of jesus I can't really believe that I'm veg*n.

Rincewind said:

..People just thingk it does.

Yes and Muslims just think pork and alcohol will destroy their soul. Cooks shouldn't bother to tell them that there is pork and alcohol in their food because they're just being irrational. likewise you travel around some countries and see how well restaurants accommodate your veg*n diet. It's just disrespectful not to take people's beliefs at face value.

[otomik]

MRSSHF said:

Well, actually it isn't LITERAL. The Eucharist is SUBSTANTIALLY changed from Bread to the Body of Christ. It means the bread BECOMES CHRIST. It does not mean the bread turns into God Meat. It's a fine distinction but an important one.

it is literal.

jesus said:

"This is my body"

the part about substance that you don't understand is that the bread is flesh in substance and that it doesn't have the physical properties of flesh but it is flesh.

http://www.ewtn.com/...http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/p6credo.htm

Quote

We believe that the Mass, celebrated by the priest representing the person of Christ by virtue of the power received through the Sacrament of Orders, and offered by him in the name of Christ and the members of His Mystical Body, is the sacrifice of Calvary rendered sacramentally present on our altars. We believe that as the bread and wine consecrated by the Lord at the Last Supper were changed into His body and His blood which were to be offered for us on the cross, likewise the bread and wine consecrated by the priest are changed into the body and blood of Christ enthroned gloriously in heaven, and we believe that the mysterious presence of the Lord, under what continues to appear to our senses as before, is a true, real and substantial presence.[35]

Christ cannot be thus present in this sacrament except by the change into His body of the reality itself of the bread and the change into His blood of the reality itself of the wine, leaving unchanged only the properties of the bread and wine which our senses perceive. This mysterious change is very appropriately called by the Church transubstantiation. Every theological explanation which seeks some understanding of this mystery must, in order to be in accord with Catholic faith, maintain that in the reality itself, independently of our mind, the bread and wine have ceased to exist after the Consecration, so that it is the adorable body and blood of the Lord Jesus that from then on are really before us under the sacramental species of bread and wine,[36] as the Lord willed it, in order to give Himself to us as food and to associate us with the unity of His Mystical Body.[37]

yes, it's tinged in medieval Aristotelian philosophy but not necessarily. there's nothing heretical about Teilhard's view that the world is the Eucharist.