A friend drew my attention to this discussion, they draw an invidious contrast between the "evangelical Bible club" and the Mass, around the 1:11-13 min. mark:
i) On the one hand you can know a lot about a person from a book (e.g. biographies, autobiographies, letters, diaries). In fact, you can know a lot more about a person through those sources than a direct encounter, because we have a public persona that conceals a great deal about ourselves.
ii) On the other hand, transubstantiation is just a Catholic projecting belief onto bread and wine. It's all in his imagination. They can't tell the difference between consecrated and unconsecrated communion elements.
iii) And even if transubstantiation was true, how is eating someone a form of fellowship? If we're going to put it in these terms, don't I have a more dynamic relationship with my pet dog by walking my dog rather than eating my dog?
Much of the uniquely Roman part of Roman Catholicism (its it’s view of the afterlife, it’s eschatology, the “communion of the saints”, etc) is really a projection of the fourth century Roman imagination.
ReplyDeleteI think the most horrific thing is that they fail to recognize the Spirit works through the Word. It's not just a book. It's living and active and is a two-edged sword.
ReplyDeleteIt also overlooks that Protestant worship has the sacrament of communion, on our own terms and understanding, worship, praying, fellowship of the saints, etc. It's not just a book club.