A question for Catholics . . .?
Do any Catholics take the concept of transubstantiation seriously? (For those that don't know, this is the belief that the bread and wine physically transform, through the power of God, into the flesh and blood of Jesus.)
If you do believe this, how do you argue against those who consider it cannibalism?
Kevin - quite the contrary. I have many problems with the Biblical story . . . I could easily mock those who believe in a literal Noah's Ark, or the literal creation story, or Jonah and the Whale.
I just don't see many questions regarding transubstantiation, which is ridiculous as well. So, I figured I'd see how people felt about it.
To everyone else - seems most of you are following the same line of thinking here, so I'll address you all at once.
And, frankly, it seems like you are just doing some mental gymnastics and wordplay. Cannibalism is simply the act of eating human flesh (or the flesh of that which is the same as you). So, the idea that it's not "really" cannibalism because you're consuming Christ's "substance" (whatever the hell that means) is ridiculous. Transubstantiation is the idea of a physical transformation of the bread into the flesh of Jesus. Who was a human. A "divine" human, supposedly, but a human nonetheless. So - I fail to see how it's not, to an extent, cannibalistic.
But, I suppose I should give you props for at least answering the question. I expected most to back away from transubstantiation. So - I was pleasantly surprised. Even if I think such ideas are absurd.
I really do admire all of you for actually admitting to this . . . for some reason, I expected people to back away from this (I guess because I find it so incredibly ridiculous).