Recently, Reason and Theology had a round table episode on the subject of Christ’s atonement which included members from the Syriac Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Chaldean Catholic, Reformed Presbyterian, and Roman Catholic communions. I was representing the Roman Catholic position, which would be the traditional Latin perspective of the West (although, I would argue, has representation in the East as well). I was the first to open with my 3-minute description of the Catholic view. Below I have given a transcript of my presentation, which includes 11 points. My attempt was to keep it as short and concise as possible. Continue reading
Very Rev. Christiaan Kappes, S.L.D., Ph.L., Ph.D. on the doctrine of Transubstantiation
by the Very Rev. Christiaan Kappes, S.L.D., Ph.L., Ph.D.
Just out of curiosity, I tried my search engine on googlebooks with the word “transubstantiation.” Number two in my search was a howler: The History of Popish Transubstantiation (1840). Again, number four of my search looked intriguing: Transubstantiation Unscriptural: Proved in Two Letters (1833). Firstly, 4 of 10 books on my first search-page were positive, while 6 of 10 were books by anti-Roman Western Christian authors. The most interesting was Ierugia: On Transubstantiation (1851), which directly cited and correctly referred to the testimony of St. Cyril of Jerusalem. As we will see, despite the state of scholarship until this last century, there was a sense that the fourth century really marked a scientific advance of the discussion of Eucharistic change. Continuing on my googlebooks choose-your-own-adventure, I finally stumbled across the first Eastern Orthodox book to enter into the fray: The Panoplia…
View original post 4,859 more words