Fortsätt till huvudinnehåll

The Innovations of the Roman Church #4 Transubstantiation

This is extracted, unedited, from “The Innovations of the Roman Church” by Apostolos Makrakis (1831-1905), “Orthodox Fundamentalist”. 

The first paragraph makes a coherent case. The second is superfluous rant. I am not going to distance myself from the main point, which leads to the belief in the power of the words of consecration alone, apart from the overall context and action in which they are spoken. From that view emanates the wider and prevalent one where liturgy can been regarded as a mere trimming. Transubstantiation also spreads over into pious practices such as Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament, and Blessed Sacrament processions, condemned in Article 25 of the Anglican Thirty-Nine Articles. The commandment in John 6 is to eat and drink.

The fourth innovation of the Popes is the doctrine that the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the very body and blood of Christ takes place simply through enunciation of the Lord’s words: “Take, eat”; which is an egregious error and heresy and a perversion of the Lord’s words, who first “blessed” the bread and afterwards invited the disciples to partake thereof by saying, “Take, eat.” Likewise, in reference to the cup, He first “gave thanks” and then said, “Drink ye of it all.”

The false doctrine under consideration is due to the Pope’s claim to primacy and infallibility. Once the Papists subscribed to the illogical and diabolical tenet of the Pope’s primacy, it was only natural that they should embrace every other foolish doctrine emanating from his infallible and diabolical head, disregarding the word of the Lord because of their own priggery.

Kommentarer

Skicka en kommentar

Populära inlägg i den här bloggen

Importing people to sustain demand

I got involved in a discussion with a Youtuber called “Philosophy all along”. This was in connection with criticism of Trump’s policy of deporting illegal migrants, which he argued would be bad for the economy as it would reduce demand. This implies that there is a need to import people to sustain demand. There is no obvious reason why a population should not be able to consume everything that the same population produces. If it can not, then something else is going on. It is a basic principle that wages are the least that workers will accept to do a job. Wages are a share of the value added by workers through their wages. The remainder is distributed as economic rent, after government has taken its cut in taxes. Monopoly profit is a temporary surplus that after a delay gets absorbed into economic rent. Land values in Silicon Valley are an example of this; it's like a gold rush. The miners get little out of it. Rent and tax syphon purchasing power away from those who produce the g...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

The Zombie Train that refuses to die

The Guardian has published a couple more articles against HS2, one by specialist rail commentator Christian Wolmar, and another today by journalist Simon Jenkins. The main arguments in favour will doubtless be wheeled out by the commentators: the need for capacity and the disruption caused by upgrading existing routes. HST itself will severely disrupt services to Euston during the construction period. Capacity can be increased at a fraction of the cost by a variety of measures, provided that it is accepted that the additional traffic will run at existing speeds. It is not generally known that the Midland main line is, or was, four track all the way from London to Trent Junction, between Nottingham and Derby. This is because the additional tracks are separate, having been added for coal trains which trundled down to Brent sidings, on the edge of London, from a collection point at Toton in Nottinghamshire, where the Midland Railway build a huge marshalling yard. Beyond Derby, the main l...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

How much more will the British tolerate?

The British are phlegmatic, tolerant and slow to rouse. Thus there was no great reaction after the terrorist attack in July 2005. The murder of Lee Rigby created a sense of outrage, but nothing more, since it appeared to be an isolated incident. Two serious incidents within a fortnight are another matter. Since the first major terrorist incident in 2001, authority has tried to persuade the public that Islam is a religion of peace, that these were isolated events, or the actions of deranged "lone wolves", having nothing to do with Islam, or to reassure that the chances of being killed in a terrorist attack were infinitesimally small. These assurances are are beginning to wear thin. They no longer convince. If government does not act effectively, people will take the law into their own hands. What, however, would effective action look like? What sort of effective action would not amount to rough justice for a lot of innocent people? Given the difficulties of keeping large n...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer