Sentences with phrase «bread and wine do»

The Church holds that the communion bread and wine do not change properties (i.e. appearance, density, etc.), but they do change essence (i.e. what they are).

Not exact matches

For if a man or a woman's body — or his or her status as a married person, or his capacity to be a father or hers to be a mother — doesn't matter for his or her sex life, why, then, should anyone imagine that the body of the Son of God matters, whether it is in a manger, on a cross, risen, or fully and really present under the signs of bread and wine?

(a) there are obvious visible changes in the condiments after the Catholic priest does his hocus pocus; (b) tests have confirmed a divine presence in the bread and wine; (c) now and then their god shows up and confirms this story; or (d) their religious convictions tell them to blindly accept this completely fvcking absurd nonsense.

He also suggests that the eschatological prospect entertained by Jesus is a later addition, and notes that it has nothing to do with the gift of bread and wine.

We do well to gather our memories around things we can touch, especially baptismal water and the bread and wine of the Easter meal.

A little unleavened bread and a cup of wine will do in most cases, because what truly brings us together is the word.

In the final frame the menorah becomes a smoldering cross, and in a nearby cave (an empty tomb), bread and wine are set at a table with the words «Do this in remembrance of me.»

Yet Jesus at the last supper; when he instituted this sacrament, did not refuse Judas the bread and the wine, despite the fact that he knew Judas was his betrayer.

The Scriptures, after all, speak constantly of a God who uses objects, yokes, pots, bread, wine and water to do his purposes.

For what do we long for when we read the Beatitudes, when we meditate on the words of Christ through lectio divina, when we join with Christians past and present to pray the hours, when we climb Teresa of Avila's «Interior Castle,» when we raise our hands in worship, when we eat the bread and drink the wine, when we walk the labyrinths, when like David we see that the night sky declares the glory of God, when we study the Bible in Hebrew and Greek, when we connect with a glorious line from Wendell Berry or Frederick Buechner, or Annie Dillard?

And the Lord's Supper confers grace because while one eats the bread and sips the wine — er, I mean the grape juice — one remembers what Jesus did on the croAnd the Lord's Supper confers grace because while one eats the bread and sips the wine — er, I mean the grape juice — one remembers what Jesus did on the croand sips the wine — er, I mean the grape juice — one remembers what Jesus did on the cross.

Nearer to the heart of the matter, but not so unanswerable, is a third question: Did Jesus himself partake of the bread and wine?

When I talk to my good friend who is a very conservative Catholic who views taking communion as sacred and every crumb is representative of Christ's body and not one crumb will drop... then compare it to how we do it at church... everyone ripping bread from the same loaf, crumbs everywhere, kids spilling the «wine»... does it really matter... is one more right than the other... one upholds church law on how communion will be performed versus our laid back version.

You likely deny evolution and global warming for no other reason than it makes you uncomfortable and hold science to the impossibly high standard of having to explain every conceivable mystery about the natural World before you will accept it, but some moron at a pulpit doing magic hand signals of a Sundaymorning is enough to convince you he is communicating with some sky - god and turning grocery store bread and wine into flesh and blood.

You all fight for first place at a table that eats bread and wine, but it doesn't give you carte blanche to pass judgement on others.

Of course, what do people do in countries that really don't have bread and wine?

So just as baptism could be done with a few drops of water, so also the Lord's Supper could be observed with a small bit of bread and a few drops of wine.

The tradition of using a tiny bit of bread and wine (or juice) has continued to be practiced, even though it does not even come close to what was practiced by Jesus and His apostles on the night He was betrayed, and reflects instead some sort of magical ceremony where some people believe that God is giving them special grace and power through the ritual elements of bread and wine.

nah — they believe that grocary store bread and wine becomes the flesh and blood of a dead Jew from 2,000 years ago because a priest does some hocus - pocus over it in church of a Sunday morning; that a being reads my mind whenever I pray and intervenes to change what would otherwise be the course of history in small ways to «answer my prayers»; and that I will survive my own physical deathand live happily ever after if I follow some rules laid down by goat herders in Bronze Age Palestine.

Go, eat your bread with enjoyment, and drink your wine with a merry heart; for God has already approved what you do.

«We must say that the accidents of the bread and the wine, which are perceived by the senses as remaining after consecration, do not have as their subject the substance of the bread and the wine, since, as has been said, that does not continue to exist.

(a) Grocery store bread and wine becomes the flesh and blood of a dead Jew from 2,000 years ago because a priest does some hocus pocus over it in church of a Sunday morning.

For me I do believe in the Sacraments and the role they play in Salvation - Jesus did change wine into this blood and the bread into his body during the last supper and told believers to do this in his memory and he did foreshadow what would happen on the Cross he gave up his life so we maybe could be saved, because not all who profess Christ is Lord or believe in God will be saved, there are many people who claim they can abuse, sleep around, steal, cheat and that they'll still go to heave because 1 day they said the sinner's prayer, actions speak louder then words.

My principal problem with the flood of «how to create community» books is not that they're trying to create community, but the terminally silly means they're using to do it — Super Bowls and tailgate parties, nachos and beer instead of the means God gave us: prayer and praise, bread and wine.

While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you of the deep inanity of your silly faith, some priest doing magic hand signals over grocery store bread and wine is enough to convince you it is thereby transformed into the flesh and blood of Jesus, because of the priest's magic powers (or «sacred powers» if you prefer the more euphemistic term).

Sitting around eating bread and drinking wine has it's place but like anything can become a simple case of chronic loafing if that's all you do.

I don't know about baptism but I'd like to exchange bread and wine for cheezits and diet dr pepper for communion.

The reception of God's grace through baptism does not automatically confer new life on the recipient; participation in the Lord's Supper does not necessarily change the recipient of bread and wine.

While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you of the deep inanity of your silly faith, some priest doing magic hand signals over bread and wine is enough to convince you it is thereby transformed into the flesh and blood of Jesus because of the priest's magic powers (or «sacred powers» to the extent you see a difference).

Furthermore, since the death and resurrection of Jesus was central to Christian belief and practice, and since teaching was often done with the help of symbols, it probably became customary as a part of nearly every meal where Christians were gathered, to remind people that the bread they were eating represented the body of Jesus which was broken for them, and the wine they were drinking represented His blood.

Jesus said go and make disciples baptising them in the name of the father and of the son and of The Holy Spirit, he also said on the night before he died Do this in remembrance of me (The partaking of the bread and wine).

31 Do not listen to Hezekiah; for thus says the king of Assyria: «Make your peace with me and come out to me; then every one of you will eat of his own vine, and every one of his own fig tree, and every one of you will drink the water of his own cistern; 32 until I come and take you away to a land like your own land, a land of grain and wine, a land of bread and vineyards, a land of olive trees and honey, that you may live, and not die.

I don't need a seat at their table — in Christ, really, there is only one table, laid out with the bread and the wine, there is room for me there.

How else would he have done the «walk on water» thing and the water to wine thing and the replication of the loaves of bread and fish?

In a similar way, the Eucharist is sacramental only because the worshipper does not rest content with the mere eating of bread and the drinking of wine.

In the Eucharist the worshipper does not unite himself with Christ, but he receives the gifts of bread and wine by which he expects inner nourishment from the sources of spiritual life upon which he depends.

offering of Christ to his heavenly Father, as we are nourished by his risen life in the receiving of bread and wine and so «make memorial» of him and of all that he did and was.

Its a neo-platonic idea, they don't necessarily believe the atomic structure of the bread and wine is actually changed, they believe its essence has changed in a spiritual sense.

Christ embraces human community fully aware of the tragic contradictions in it, and he does so through the symbols of bread broken and wine poured.

Still trying to agree on a definition of the Eucharist, theologians over a wide range of background had finally agreed in the Wittenberg Concord that «with the consecrated bread and wine, the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present, shown forth and received», also that the sacrament has its authentic value in the Church and does not depend on the status of either the minister or the recipient.

Ultimately it is just bread and wine, symbolizing Jesus and what He did for us, so any Christian should be welcome.

A narrative of a Lenten meditation in poetic form written from the standpoint of the apostle Thomas: And if it were not for his love, his grace that sought me out behind locked doors, called me to touch and then believe, I would not be here at your humble table ready now with you, to break the bread and pour the wine as he did years aAnd if it were not for his love, his grace that sought me out behind locked doors, called me to touch and then believe, I would not be here at your humble table ready now with you, to break the bread and pour the wine as he did years aand then believe, I would not be here at your humble table ready now with you, to break the bread and pour the wine as he did years aand pour the wine as he did years ago.

The only change in transubstantiation is also invisible, so the accidents of bread and wine remain, and so does Jesus, until these accidents are no longer evident.

Given my belief that communion wine can be validly consecrated into the Blood of Christ, and communion bread into the Body of Christ, we can now cue all the folks who will make jokes about cannibalism, etc. (just as the Romans did about early Christians — very little anti-Christian humor is original).

And if it were not for his love, his grace that sought me out behind locked doors, called me to touch and then believe, I would not be here at your humble table ready now with you, to break the bread and pour the wine as he did years aAnd if it were not for his love, his grace that sought me out behind locked doors, called me to touch and then believe, I would not be here at your humble table ready now with you, to break the bread and pour the wine as he did years aand then believe, I would not be here at your humble table ready now with you, to break the bread and pour the wine as he did years aand pour the wine as he did years ago.

It seemed to me as if, in all he did that evening at the table, he too was finding meaning and enlightenment, as if, in breaking bread and pouring wine, our Lord himself was being led — as we were through him — into a new and richer comprehension, into a full and final revelation that this, of course, was why it must be so — that only as a grain of wheat falls to the ground and dies can it arise again and bring forth ripe new grain to form the loaf that feeds a hungry world.

We don't eat bread pretending it's the actual body of Christ, nor do we drink wine pretending it to be the actual blood of Christ; we recognize bread as bread, and wine as wine, but we know what they represent.

If you took a step back and looked at what y» all do in an objective way, i.e. followed some book word for word written by over 100 people over a 900 year period, gather weekly in a building and sing songs together and eat bread and drink wine as if it were anything but what it is, list goes on.

Now of course there's no real change, it's all pretend and the stuff is still bread and wine after he does his magic act, but they convince themselves i has somehow changed.

I am (a) a delusional schizophrenic; (b) a naïve child, too young to know that that is silly (c) an ignorant farmer from Sudan who never had the benefit of even a fifth grade education; or (d) your average Christian Millions and millions of Catholics believe that bread and wine turns into the actual flesh and blood of a dead Jew from 2,000 years ago because: (a) there are obvious visible changes in the condiments after the Catholic priest does his hocus pocus; (b) tests have confirmed a divine presence in the bread and wine; (c) now and then their god shows up and confirms this story; or (d) their religious convictions tell them to blindly accept this completely fvcking absurd nonsense.