Aquinas, Sacraments & Wormholes

[colton]

[...] because the Lamb was slain before the foundation of the world. Maybe it's less a time tear and more like accessing a river whose source sprung at a certain place and time. To drink from that water is to participate with the source and does not do away with remembering.

You beat me to it.

but I think it's able to hold some of the tension of participation and remembrance.

You might say it...holds water.

[Del]

Very honestly asking here. No calvinist tricks. Really just thinking through this and would like yer help.

Sacraments are way beyond being memorials of the birth of Christ(Christmas) the sacrifice and resurrection of Christ(Easter) nor are they reenactments (Christ is not crucified every year) but the real deals we mystically participate in somehow.

"It does not merely 'represent' the reality. It 're-presents' the reality. It makes the reality 'present' for us. The veil of eternity is pulled back, and we are 'present' at the Last Supper, at the foot of the Cross, at the Resurrection."

Speaking as one who also affirms that the Eucharist is more than a mere memorial, so I'm not trying to defend that position, how does one make jive the idea of being both here and there (ie at the cross) with our Lord commanding us to "do this in remembrance of me". That is to say, how do we remember, as we're commanded, if we are truly present?

It would seem 'being truly present' would by it's very nature discount remembering. Remembering seems to be the very thing one would do when not present, but it's the very thing we're told to do.

As is so often the case, it's not a choice between either remembering or being present. It is both remembering and being present.

The Passover celebration of the Old Covenant was and is sacramental worship. The Jews are very much "remembering." They are also making present the preparation for flight and journey during their worship. In accord with pharisaic theology, "worship" and "remembering" are one and the same.

In the Passover meal, the Father foreshadowed the way for Jesus to make Himself present in the New Passover of His New Covenant. It is ancient Christian faith to see "Do this in remembrance of Me" as meaning "When you gather to remember Me in worship, DO THIS."
========================================

Just for fun.... You are probably aware that Jesus refused to drink from the closing cup of the Passover, leaving the Last Supper ceremony open until he "drank again in when the Kingdom of God comes." But then he asked for drink just before He died on the Cross.... tasting the wine, He announced, "It is finished."

Here is a blog from a Bible guy. My heart goes out to him.... He's so close!

He has all the verses right in front of him, but his theological tradition won't let him to see much of what Christ did in the arc of the Last Supper/Crucifixion.
Did Jesus break His promise to abstain from wine?

He insists that Christ's sip on the cross amounts to nothing at all! (He was just thirsty.)

Following the third cup, Jesus stated He will not drink wine again until He reaches the Kingdom. Jesus wasn’t pledging to never consumer wine in any form since we see He consumed a tiny portion on the cross. Such a pledge would have served no spiritual purpose. Instead, Jesus was speaking specifically about refraining from drinking the fourth cup of wine served during the Passover meal.

Pastor Blogger only sees the "work of redemption." He doesn't see that Christ also established His New Kingdom (the Church), His New Covenant, His new priesthood, and His New Passover.

Pastor Blogger believes that the "Kingdom" won't start until Christ returns.... final paragraph:

So, during the 2,000+ years since Jesus’ death and resurrection, the Church has been waiting for the resumption of that Passover meal, which will occur when we participate with Jesus in drinking that fourth cup of wine at the start of the Kingdom. The fourth cup of the Passover meal is traditionally called the cup of thanksgiving, and we will certainly be thanking the Lord for the Kingdom on the day we drink it with Him!

I wonder if he even knows that Eucharist means Thanksgiving?

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

But what if "Remember" meant … like … Re-Member? As in the opposite of Dis-Member. To put all the pieces of the Body together in one place, where the Eagles gather?

English is super cool like that.

But...anamnēsin is the word here and it doesn't work that way.

[…]

I would't be so sure about that. Seems to me that Platonic anamnesis (especially in its Neoplatonic developments) can very well bear such semantic resonances, viz., a rejoining — a Re-Collection — of that which has been sundered or distanced.

[tuttle]

+JMJ+

But what if "Remember" meant … like … Re-Member? As in the opposite of Dis-Member. To put all the pieces of the Body together in one place, where the Eagles gather?

English is super cool like that.

But...anamnēsin is the word here and it doesn't work that way.

[…]

I would't be so sure about that. Seems to me that Platonic anamnesis (especially in its Neoplatonic developments) can very well bear such semantic resonances, viz., a rejoining — a Re-Collection — of that which has been sundered or distanced.

Ha I was being pedantic about the word play. But I hear you

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

English is super cool like that.

But...anamnēsin is the word here and it doesn't work that way.

[…]

I would't be so sure about that. Seems to me that Platonic anamnesis (especially in its Neoplatonic developments) can very well bear such semantic resonances, viz., a rejoining — a Re-Collection — of that which has been sundered or distanced.

Ha I was being pedantic about the word play. But I hear you

Alrighty.

It's a wrap.

[tuttle]

[mcommini]

Pastor Blogger believes that the "Kingdom" won't start until Christ returns.... final paragraph:

So, during the 2,000+ years since Jesus’ death and resurrection, the Church has been waiting for the resumption of that Passover meal, which will occur when we participate with Jesus in drinking that fourth cup of wine at the start of the Kingdom. The fourth cup of the Passover meal is traditionally called the cup of thanksgiving, and we will certainly be thanking the Lord for the Kingdom on the day we drink it with Him!

I wonder if he even knows that Eucharist means Thanksgiving?

It is entirely possible that he doesn't. I've had evangelicals who supposedly know Koine Greek tell me with a straight face that the word "Eucharist" is never mentioned in the Bible.

I need to reread Aquinas. I've been putting it off because while his thought is fascinating, the Summa is just so boring. Which reminds me, I need to reread Aristotle.

[Del]

Pastor Blogger believes that the "Kingdom" won't start until Christ returns.... final paragraph:

So, during the 2,000+ years since Jesus’ death and resurrection, the Church has been waiting for the resumption of that Passover meal, which will occur when we participate with Jesus in drinking that fourth cup of wine at the start of the Kingdom. The fourth cup of the Passover meal is traditionally called the cup of thanksgiving, and we will certainly be thanking the Lord for the Kingdom on the day we drink it with Him!

I wonder if he even knows that Eucharist means Thanksgiving?

It is entirely possible that he doesn't. I've had evangelicals who supposedly know Koine Greek tell me with a straight face that the word "Eucharist" is never mentioned in the Bible.

I need to reread Aquinas. I've been putting it off because while his thought is fascinating, the Summa is just so boring. Which reminds me, I need to reread Aristotle.

I have heard Evangelicals insist that "Catholic" is not in the Bible. But it is.... it's just that "Catholic" is a Greek word, and their Bible is in English.

We (the Apostolic Church, modern East and West, 'Roman' and 'Orthodox') were named the "Catholic Church" before the canon of Scripture was gathered. We are "The Church Throughout the World." I have seen the verse which speaks of "the Church throughout the world," but I don't remember the citation.... that's an Evangelical habit. I just know that it's there.

The first mention of "Katholicos Ekklesia" was in the early 100's. The Bible is the Sacred Scripture of the Catholic Church. Protestants use our Bible. (God bless their hearts!)
===================================
I have a treasure in my home. A millennial son (which, by definition, still lives at home) who attended a Catholic classical academy high school. Then he earned a philosophy degree in seminary. The kind of young man who asks for a copy of Aquinas's Summa printed side-by-side in Latin and English -- as a Christmas gift. He recently read the Aristotle's Physics. Now he is reading Plutarch's Lives of notable figures from the Roman Republic.

Pipeson is the sort of fellow who re-reads The Consolation of Philosophy by Boethius.... as one often does.

Last night, Pipeson discovered that Geoffrey Chaucer translated The Consolation into Middle English.... then he found a facsimile copy available for sale (1887 edition). He bought it for himself as a Christmas gift.

And as he is a lively and sanguine sort of guy.... if he's reading a book, then we are all living the book with him. He gets excited about stuff.

So I MUST read the Summa. If I have any questions.... no problem!
===================================
What little I have been exposed to Thomas's Summa has been exhilarating. So much wisdom, condensed in such a dense space. The trick is to realize that the journey is worth the time.

On Page 1 of the Summa, Thomas observes that it is possible to know many truths about God by Reason (Philosophy) alone.... that is, by observing Creation closely and thinking deeply. But this knowledge is only possible to a few very wise persons. After a very, very long time. And not without some errors mixed in.

[Aristotle got it.... but few can be Aristotle. Yet Aristotle would have killed to have the wisdom that every common medieval housewife held in the Apostle's Creed.]

Thomas says that this is why we need both Philosophy -- plus Revelation and Theology.

This is on Page 1 of the Summa! Every page is as insightful as this. It is worth taking the time and effort to slog through. Count it as joy!

[Hovannes]

Pastor Blogger believes that the "Kingdom" won't start until Christ returns.... final paragraph:


I wonder if he even knows that Eucharist means Thanksgiving?

It is entirely possible that he doesn't. I've had evangelicals who supposedly know Koine Greek tell me with a straight face that the word "Eucharist" is never mentioned in the Bible.

I need to reread Aquinas. I've been putting it off because while his thought is fascinating, the Summa is just so boring. Which reminds me, I need to reread Aristotle.

I have heard Evangelicals insist that "Catholic" is not in the Bible. But it is.... it's just that "Catholic" is a Greek word, and their Bible is in English.

We (the Apostolic Church, modern East and West, 'Roman' and 'Orthodox') were named the "Catholic Church" before the canon of Scripture was gathered. We are "The Church Throughout the World." I have seen the verse which speaks of "the Church throughout the world," but I don't remember the citation.... that's an Evangelical habit. I just know that it's there.

The first mention of "Katholicos Ekklesia" was in the early 100's. The Bible is the Sacred Scripture of the Catholic Church. Protestants use our Bible. (God bless their hearts!)
===================================
I have a treasure in my home. A millennial son (which, by definition, still lives at home) who attended a Catholic classical academy high school. Then he earned a philosophy degree in seminary. The kind of young man who asks for a copy of Aquinas's Summa printed side-by-side in Latin and English -- as a Christmas gift. He recently read the Aristotle's Physics. Now he is reading Plutarch's Lives of notable figures from the Roman Republic.

Pipeson is the sort of fellow who re-reads The Consolation of Philosophy by Boethius.... as one often does.

Last night, Pipeson discovered that Geoffrey Chaucer translated The Consolation into Middle English.... then he found a facsimile copy available for sale (1887 edition). He bought it for himself as a Christmas gift.

And as he is a lively and sanguine sort of guy.... if he's reading a book, then we are all living the book with him. He gets excited about stuff.

So I MUST read the Summa. If I have any questions.... no problem!
===================================
What little I have been exposed to Thomas's Summa has been exhilarating. So much wisdom, condensed in such a dense space. The trick is to realize that the journey is worth the time.

On Page 1 of the Summa, Thomas observes that it is possible to know many truths about God by Reason (Philosophy) alone.... that is, by observing Creation closely and thinking deeply. But this knowledge is only possible to a few very wise persons. After a very, very long time. And not without some errors mixed in.

[Aristotle got it.... but few can be Aristotle. Yet Aristotle would have killed to have the wisdom that every common medieval housewife held in the Apostle's Creed.]

Thomas says that this is why we need both Philosophy -- plus Revelation and Theology.

This is on Page 1 of the Summa! Every page is as insightful as this. It is worth taking the time and effort to slog through. Count it as joy!

Del, one thing about the Summa that really amazed my reading group was how on earth did Thomas write this? It was all done by dictation and keeping track of all the citations alone probably would have taken a super computer, but they didn't have super computers back then. How did Thomas remember all that stuff?
It's amazing.

[mcommini]

I've read through the Summa a few times - mostly in those dim and misty days of my late teens and early twenties. Hit it up about once every five years after that, though I'm going on a good decade by now. I love St Thomas's thought, his expression is just so dry and formulaic. He misses the influence of the poetry of the theologians he draws from and reduces everything to cold statistical calculation.

And in this he is much like his master Aristotle- Aristotle was great at creating systems, but he never reaches the poetry and drama of Plato. Aristotle can write Poetics but he cannot create - or recreate - Plato for us as Plato could Socrates. And Aquinas can distill (Pseudo-) St Denys- but his writing never conveys the heights of seeing the seven heavens that St Denys does.

I say "he misses the influence" and "his writings" because it is quite clear that St Thomas did indeed see the poetry of his predecessors and know the heights of St Denys. And when he knew those heights he could say no more, because he lacked the poetry to express himself.

There are times - believe it or not - when I want to read to a manual for fun. But having read the manual, I tend to return to it more often when I need it than for the mere curiosity of knowing. Like- I can spend a day looking over the schematics for on old Tandy 1000 for the fun of it, but after that unless I have an old Tandy 1000 in front of me and a hankering to get it back on it's feet, I'll just watch Tron.

Just to bring this all back around to the original question- Hovannes, I think you'll see some confirmation of your hypothesis in this thread over here: viewtopic.php?t=469

I cannot deny some possible Thomistic influence in my Orthodox understanding of Sacraments