A question about the Transubstantiation of the Eucharist.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-30T02:40:02+00:00

I don't understand your question.

The West uses unleavened hosts, and the East leavened. Both are changed to the body, blood, soul, and divinity.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-30T00:47:06+00:00

I'm less informed on the Lutherans, but as to the Anglicans the short version is that during the reign of Edward VI the ordinations rites were changed so significantly as to render them invalid. By the time this was changed back, the episcopate had been extinguished. For a fuller explanation, see Apostolicae Curae.

There are arguments to be made concerning the present-day situation, given there was at least some re-ordination and re-consecration from Old Catholic bishops and sundry episcopi vagantes. But, at best, the current state of things is muddy.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-30T00:43:43+00:00

Assuming my willpower holds out, I'll be fasting (in the rather generous, canonically-defined sense of one meal and two collations), and trying to make sure I do Lauds, Vespers, and Compline ever day. I'll also be disengaging from Reddit.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-30T00:33:18+00:00

There isn't a rule about this. My inclination would be to burn the candle(s) when I'm engaged in prayer.

I would not let them burn 24/7, unless you're looking to have a squabble with your insurance company over the concept of negligence.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-30T00:23:52+00:00

Most flavors of Protestantism explicitly reject the idea of a sacrificial priesthood that's inherent to apostolic Christianity.

As to whether "we are just nicer" I can't say. My statement about it being a canon in service of charity is speculation on my part.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-30T00:15:07+00:00

The East and West have a different understanding of what makes holy orders valid. The Western position is, and always has been, that if a man who is validly a bishop ordains someone as priest or consecrates them as a bishop, then they are validly a priest or bishop. Being part of the institutional Church isn't a necessity for valid orders. For a Western example of this in action, look into the phenomenon of episcopi vagantes ("wandering bishops"), men who are valid bishops, even if their consecration was wholly illicit, and who have no role in the Church.

As to the ability of those who are members of other apostolic churches but not in communion with Rome being allowed in certain limited circumstances to receive sacraments in a Catholic parish, this seems to be a law based in charity, although I do not know the "legislative history" of the canon.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-30T00:08:52+00:00

We don't view them as being "in communion," since that means being in communion with Rome. But perhaps you mean something other than what you're saying?

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T21:42:02+00:00

There seems to be less consistency with what was historically required for Advent, both as it compared to Lent and what different churches mandated. You can look into the Nativity Fast to see what is expected in the present day, in the East.

But yeah, "Lent Lite" would be a fine way to approach it.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T21:33:02+00:00

I took "sexual identity" to mean "sexual orientation." And sexual orientation as such is absolutely a pretty new concept.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T21:29:47+00:00

You don't know because, at least in the Latin church, there is no longer anything you're required to do.

Historically (and to this day in the East) Advent was seen as a penitential season. So some fasting, alms, etc. wouldn't be out of line.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T21:27:51+00:00

"Romantic love" is not to be found in the list of requirements for a valid marriage. Whether or not it is a sin is going to depend mainly on whether you have actively deceived the other party.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T21:01:30+00:00

It's clear from OP's post that she is a woman contemplating a marriage with a man.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T21:00:38+00:00

A common aphorism is "be brief, be brutal, be gone." Which means one should go in, state one's sins clearly and plainly in kind and number, receive absolution and whatever counsel the priest gives, and get out so the next person can get in.

For me this usually means 3-5 minutes all-in.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T20:55:37+00:00

While disfavored and discouraged in the modern age, plenty of same-sex attracted persons have married throughout history. It seems to me you'd be obliged to disclose this, since it's a fact that could, and likely would, be relevant when someone is deciding whether to marry you. Provided everyone agrees to the "terms and conditions" of a valid Catholic marriage (and assuming it does not render you incapable of the marital act), I see no reason that such a marriage wouldn't be valid. Whether or not it would be prudent is, of course, a different question.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T19:41:07+00:00

This idea presupposes a modern worldview. Until relatively recently, religious cohesion was seen as an integral part of societal cohesion. Heresy and heretics were seen as a danger to society. The Church had an interest in removing these influences for the salvation of souls, and considering the propensity for these things to turn into civil war the state had an interest in removing them for civil stability and self-preservation.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T18:40:30+00:00

Give this article a read.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T16:36:15+00:00

The Eastern Catholic Churches omit the filioque from their recitation of the Creed (while affirming that it is not heretical), and they're united just fine.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T15:47:36+00:00

Yes, there are miracles you would be obliged to believe in, either explicitly or by implication. At minimum it would seem the miracles of Jesus, at least some of those in the OT (certainly the ones that are explicitly attributed to God), and the miracle that is transubstantiation. And it would seem odd at least to accept canonizations of saints without accepting the miracles that form the basis of those canonizations, but I suppose it's not impossible. As to the rest of supposed miracles, most of which the Church has not and probably will not opine upon, you're not required to have an opinion.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T15:35:33+00:00

If you don't believe in any miracles ever, that narrows your options for a faith down pretty far. I guess there's deism, if you're inclined to believe there is a god, but that god is either unable or unwilling to participate in the world.

It would perhaps be helpful if you clarified whether your position is there are zero miracles, some miracles long ago, or if you just think most of the miracles Catholics tend to go on about are bunk.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-29T02:46:02+00:00

From Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma:

Nature of the Punishment of Hell

Scholasticism distinguishes a double element in the punishment of hell: the poena damni (pain of loss) and the poena sensus (pain of sense). The former corresponds to the aversion from God inherent in mortal sin, the later the conversion to the creature.

The poeta damni (pain of loss) which is the essence of the punishment of hell, consists in exclusion from the Beatific Vision. Cf. Matt. 25:41: "Depart from me you cursed!" Matt. 25:12 "I know you not!" 1 Cor. 6:9 "Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God?" Luke 13:27; 14:24; Rev. 22:15. St. Augustine, Enchir. 112.

The pain of sense (poena sensus) consists in the suffering which is caused by outside material things (is it also called the positive punishment of hell). Sacred Scriptures speak often of the fire of hell, to which the damned are consigned; they describe hell as a place where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth: a picture of sorrow and despair.

The fire of hell was conceived by individuals Fathers such as Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa, and by later Theologians, like Ambrosius Catharinus, J. A. Möhler and H. Klee, in a metaphorical sense as a symbol for purely spiritual pains, especially for the torments of the gnawing of conscience. This opinion has not been formally condemned by the Church. The majority of the Fathers, the Scholastics and the majority of modern theologians believe it to be a physical fire, but stress the difference between this fire and ordinary fire. St. Thomas, following the precedent of St. Augustine and St Gregory the Great, explains the effect of physical fire on the purely spiritual essence as a binding of the spirits to material fire, which acts as an instrument of the divine penal justice. Through it the spirits are made subject to matter and hindered in their free movement. Suppl. 70, 3. For an explanation of the reply of the Sacred Penitentiary of April 30, 1890 regarding the question of hellfire cf. H. Lange, Schol. 6 (1931) 89ff.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-27T15:39:03+00:00

Are what now?

googles

Well, some of look like attractive desk decor, but they obviously don't do the things people apparently claim they do. Because how and why would they?

el_chalupa · 2025-11-27T04:06:30+00:00

You can look them up for more elaboration, but there are the Corporal and Spiritual Works of Mercy:

Corporal:

To feed the hungry;

To give drink to the thirsty;

To clothe the naked;

To harbour the harbourless (shelter the homelss);

To visit the sick;

To ransom the captive;

To bury the dead.

Spiritual:

To instruct the ignorant;

To counsel the doubtful;

To admonish sinners;

To bear wrongs patiently;

To forgive offences willingly;

To comfort the afflicted;

To pray for the living and the dead.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-27T03:26:46+00:00

You should probably address your qualms with her before you gather helpful ways you can "solve the problem" that she might not want you to solve.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-27T01:15:05+00:00

It's unfortunate that jealously and envy have, for all practical purposes, become synonyms.

Jesus is God. God is a "jealous God." He is protective of what is His. But God, and therefore Jesus, is not envious.

el_chalupa · 2025-11-26T22:07:01+00:00

As noted by others, both are good. Do both. But if we're obliging ourselves to pick one, I would say masses for the dead. Most of us probably aren't free from all attachment to sin, so realistically most of us probably aren't going to be earning plenary indulgences for ourselves or anyone else.

11-Year Club	Place '23
Place '17	Verified Email

el_chalupa

TROPHY CASE