If many Christians believe in transubstantiation, (wine & cracker transform into body & blood of Christ) does that mean they approve of cannibalism? If not, why not?
don't fall for Christianity....the hors d'oeuvres suck....
What a cop out! If they wanted to keep things real they should just demand a human sacrifice at the end of service to make sure they're all really committed to their religion. Jk... All that is just a weird remnant from the old pagan religions that Christianity plegiarized. I find it weird that none of the followers have questioned that particular ritual.
You have just made me ask myself quite a few questions.... I grew up Mormon an would raid the sacrament cabinet full of crumbled Wunderbread and water after service with friends because we were starving. Sorry everyone! I ate your idol!
How many of those crackers do you need to eat to consume an entire jesus?
Brilliant! Love it. You're the best GWEN
It's an atypical (for Catholics) literal reading of Bible verses describing the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. Sure, technically that makes it cannibalism, but Catholics no more think of it in those terms than evangelicals find being "washed in the blood" of Jesus to be ghastly. They are so used to the notion that it doesn't bother them.
I concur with that that is what many of them think. However, it is still actually cannibalism and they are again having that compartmentalization and cognitive dissonance brain activities going on.
In cultuarl anthro they called ritual canibalism
To a certain definition of ritual cannibalism yes.
But you can only eat and drink Jesus.
Anybody else is idol worship, I guess.
Jesus is the flavor of the millenium!
What’s the reasoning either way? Why are we eating a guy and drinking his blood? Why? I read the Bible, I don’t remember that one
This very question helped greatly to my becoming persona non gratis, in parochial school. A fine day in my life. It seemed to me no matter how they chopped him up it was unpalatable.
Well, let's face it, ya'll, if you can believe that God turned up in the Bronze Age, impregnated himself into woman, got himself born, was illiterate, worked as a labourer, performed miracles, was happy to be tortured and then killed, and then came back from the dead, then, quite frankly, you'll have no problem believing he's happy to be eaten and drunk by those who consider him as their saviour. Simple really.
When I took communion I’m pretty sure it was a metaphor, but I don’t really know what was in the cracker?
It still tastes just like matzo and cheap wine even after the "transubstantiation" occurs so if it does change it changes but not really. the church denies that it's cannibalism. When you ask how can it not be cannibalism if transubstantiation is real the answer is the usual answer that you get for such questions. It's a "mystery of faith."
When I was a child and my grandparents would take me to church in hopes that I'd actually pay attention and believe, they had all the children go up and "drink the blood of Christ and eat his flesh". For us, they used grape juice. I ate and drank mine, but the kid next in line was scared. Being that I wasn't really able to control the volume of my voice as a kid, I said very loudly "don't worry, it's only grape juice" and half the church laughed and the other half wasn't pleased. It was great cause they asked my grandparents to leave me at home if possible from then on.
IMO, transubstantiation makes the belief in god seem tame. Got to go with Hermann Hesse-just an insanity.
Certain christian denominations believe in transubstantiation, other vehemently reject that belief & see communuion as a ritual remembrance. There are those who believe in free will & others who believe predestination. 1 blanket cannot cover all the crazy.
If I'm not mistaken, this was one of the main reasons why the Romans were so disapproving of Christianity. They literally thought that the early Christians were eat the flesh of other human beings and the Romans found that repulsive.