Talk:Eucharist

In the light of the present discussion I have cut the following as it might just be a tad too inflammatory.--Bob^{bing up} 15:38, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

The Eucharist invloves the process of Transubstantiation, in which a piece of bread become the living, raw and uncooked flesh of Jesus and red wine becomes his freshly-squeezed blood.

It is claimed that those who drink the blood of Jesus will live forever, however this shouldn't be confused with classical vampirism, as the blood isn't actually running through the veins of a virgin at the time of drinking, and no biting of necks is involved.

I dunno, getting a bad rating from the Catholic League could really boost numbers on the site. The One True CЯacke®Kneel when thou speakest it!

Looks good to me... except the typo I fixed... ħuman 18:54, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Not just Catholic

I would remind the honoured mob that the Eucharist is a sacrament for practically all Christian denominations, not just the Catholics, and that they each understand it in significantly different ways. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:08, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Did Billy Graham have a coniption when it got stolen? --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 17:14, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

I don't quite think I follow...? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:15, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, while all of them have it, all of the denominations didn't go after Meyers for what he said. User:Storytellershrink

Do all of them have it? The more radical protestants don't, do they? What is the take over at the "other site" I wonder.--Ban^{Vote for me} 17:19, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

No, but I assume this is an article about the Eucharist in general, not just about the recent incident. Ban, I'm pretty sure that practically all denominations practice the Eucharist in some form or another, although it can be more or less ritual in nature. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 17:28, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

I agree, but I doubt anyone would have even thought about making it without PZ. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 17:32, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Hehe, yeah. I find it hard to imagine any Christian not doing the bread & wine thing at least once a year. What meaning or transcendence they assign to the chow would vary, of course. I wonder if CP has an article on the eucharist? I wonder if it's as good as ourn? ħuman 18:27, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

FYI, the ceremony is generally referred to as "communion" in Protestant circles, in my experience, and hence, the meal is often known as such as well. Furthermore, and again in my experience, it does not tend to be highly "ritualized", in the sense of any great importance being placed upon the physical meal. Rather, the emphasis falls upon the ceremony itself, "this do in remembrance of me". I'm not sure if this is relevant to anything in this discussion, but I thought I might as well say it. --λινυσ^(☮) 18:38, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh, and my experience in this matter is confined to a rather limited number of United States churches on the East coast, so I wouldn't take it as highly authoritative. --λινυσ^(☮) 18:42, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Linus is right, according to the CP article. Protestant circles just call it communion, eucharist is the RCC (& Eastern?) term for it. Maybe we should move this to communion, leave the redirect, and 'splain all this fancy stuff. ħuman 18:52, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

At least around these parts, Eucharist is used among Protestants as well, if somewhat rarely - it's mostly found in academic circles. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:00, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

It's mostly called the Eucharist in academic circles because to academics, "communion" is the group of people bound together by the act, ie the anglican communion. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 23:59, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Theft of the Eucharist

What exactly is being stolen? A bit of crunchiness, an idea, a reification or what? 82.44.143.26 (talk) 18:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Host desecration

Forget the Nazis, the Catholic Church actually persecuted Jews for stomping on crackers. Is there anything we can add that WP doesn't already? -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Origin

If you support the idea that any given civilization's laws and beliefs are simply modifications of both previous and current interacting neighboring civilizations, then it's highly likely that the ceremony of the Eucharist is simply an extension of human sacrifice, which was practiced by many civilizations in the region prior to and during the time when Christianity was forming. Many other civilizations believed in the power of the sacrifice, including the consumption of body and blood of the sacrifice. The Old Testament itself mentions human sacrifice. The Gauls, who sacked Rome in 390 BC, practiced it. The Romans themselves did, and it was from within the Roman civilization that Christianity formed. I think that gives strong support to the idea that The Eucharist is nothing more than another type of ritual human sacrifice. Does anyone think this should be part of the page? InfinitelySingular (talk) 13:09, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Annnnnndddd.....done. Needs some citations, though. InfinitelySingular (talk) 12:58, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Can someone please post some citations? It's well known that the Gauls performed human sacrifices, but the Romans generally opposed the idea and it was banned by law during the consulship of Publius Licinius Crassus and Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus in 97 BCE according to Pliny. This was long before anyone had ever heard of Jesus or christianity. 195.88.251.148 (talk) 18:40, 19 February 2017 (UTC)