Anglican & Lutheran Eucharistic miracles

  • Thread starter Thread starter dizzy_dave
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear Central FL James:

I hate to hear that. If possible please do not do so.

You are correct. We are off of point at the moment.

Therefore, I will cease posting on this subject as it has deviated from the thread topic and seems to be provoking an angry response.

I initially did so as a rebuttal to a post which seems to have opened Pandoras Box on the matter. I see that was a mistake and I apologize for the result.

Yours in Christ,

Veritashunter
 
Truthstalker said:
My post 80, on topic, seems to have been overlooked.
Click to expand...
I think it was in the context of a discussion, the point of which is, that if you wind up with a mouth full of blood at Communion, don’t tell anyone. These things happen and the focus is to be on Christ, not on what we experience.

I think a lot happens that no one ever knows about. I have personally had some strange things happen at Communion, but I am not really willing to share them, only to say that it would not surprise me for someone to taste warm salty liquid and flesh instead of wine and bread.

Catholics do not have a monopoly on this.
 
Truthstalker;:
I think a lot happens that no one ever knows about. I have personally had some strange things happen at Communion…
Click to expand...
I’ve been looking at Perry Stone’s The Meal That Heals. It lists the benefits of daily Communion as:
  • Atonement
  • Emotional Healing
  • Physical Healing
This practice is not to be considered to be a magical ritual. Furthermore, it is not supposed to become a religious ritual, for which all meaning has been lost.

The show where he first aired that idea, did cite a couple of examples of what could be construed as “miracles”. However, they do not appear to be cited in the book. (I don’t know if the DVD contains them, or not.)

I’d also suggest that given the difference between Catholic and Protestant Christianity, in the point of celebrating Eucharist/Communion, that which would be construed as a “Miracle” in Catholic Christianity, would simply be viewed as “God answers prayers” in Protestant Christianity.

xan

jonathon
 
I wonder if the original premise of the thread was that there ARE and CANNOT be non-Catholic Eucharistic miracles, as these come about to demonstrate the rightness of Catholic belief in transubstantiation. One cannot, it is supposed, have a validation of transubstantiation among those who do not believe in it, in particular among the Anglicans and Lutherans.

What throws a wrench in this theory is that I am Presbyterian. I recognize Christ’s full presence in the Sacrament - but it is dynamically apprehended through faith. To me Eucharistic miracles demonstrate not the validity of Catholic theology but rather the on-going miraculous nature of His redemptive inferference in His creation that is going to pieces.

I stated that poorly, as always, but I wonder.
 
Truthstalker said:
I wonder if the original premise of the thread was that there ARE and CANNOT be non-Catholic Eucharistic miracles, as these come about to demonstrate the rightness of Catholic belief in transubstantiation. One cannot, it is supposed, have a validation of transubstantiation among those who do not believe in it, in particular among the Anglicans and Lutherans.

What throws a wrench in this theory is that I am Presbyterian. I recognize Christ’s full presence in the Sacrament - but it is dynamically apprehended through faith. To me Eucharistic miracles demonstrate not the validity of Catholic theology but rather the on-going miraculous nature of His redemptive inferference in His creation that is going to pieces.

I stated that poorly, as always, but I wonder.
Click to expand...
I think the gist of the OP was that there cannot be such miracles absent a valid priesthood to confect the sacrament. This is irrespective of the opinions relative to transubstantiation.

GKC
 
GKC said:
I think the gist of the OP was that there cannot be such miracles absent a valid priesthood to confect the sacrament. This is irrespective of the opinions relative to transubstantiation.

GKC
Click to expand...
Hmmm.

The textus receptus of the OP seems to be ambivalent. It is the tradition that has grown up around a particular interpretation of the OP that would suggest that the seed is priesthood as opposed to transubstantiation. Confection, it is argued among the Catholics, only occurs with a valid priesthood.

My experience and doctrine of course argue against that. It still leaves me with the question of What Is Going On, one I have had for a long time.
 
Truthstalker said:
Hmmm.

The textus receptus of the OP seems to be ambivalent. It is the tradition that has grown up around a particular interpretation of the OP that would suggest that the seed is priesthood as opposed to transubstantiation. Confection, it is argued among the Catholics, only occurs with a valid priesthood.

My experience and doctrine of course argue against that. It still leaves me with the question of What Is Going On, one I have had for a long time.
Click to expand...
It is so argued amongst many Anglicans, too. The tangential argument lies in whether there is a valid priesthood, outside that recognised by Rome.

GKC
 
The Garden of the Little Flower and Other Mystical Experiences by Helen Evans with many witnesses/testimonials documents the author’s mystical experiences with the Eucharist in her Episcopal Church.

Relevent to this discussion:

voice from the tabernacle, vision at High Mass, angels at Mass, many experiences with strong odor of incense or various flowers either coming from the tabernacle or accompanying the Episcopal priest to her bedside

Most heart touching, one evening she became aware of the Lord’s grief and begged for an explanation. Finally she heard the Lord say, “It is one of my priests and then"ONe of My priests is going to shame and humiliate Me beyond all bounds, tomorro.”

The following morning her rector (Pastor) resigned his cure to become Roman Catholic, denying his Anglican orders.
 
CatherineJones said:
The Garden of the Little Flower and Other Mystical Experiences by Helen Evans with many witnesses/testimonials documents the author’s mystical experiences with the Eucharist in her Episcopal Church.

Relevent to this discussion:

voice from the tabernacle, vision at High Mass, angels at Mass, many experiences with strong odor of incense or various flowers either coming from the tabernacle or accompanying the Episcopal priest to her bedside

Most heart touching, one evening she became aware of the Lord’s grief and begged for an explanation. Finally she heard the Lord say, “It is one of my priests and then"ONe of My priests is going to shame and humiliate Me beyond all bounds, tomorro.”

The following morning her rector (Pastor) resigned his cure to become Roman Catholic, denying his Anglican orders.

Hmmmm.

Not convincing.

GKC
Click to expand...
 
CatherineJones said:
The Garden of the Little Flower and Other Mystical Experiences by Helen Evans with many witnesses/testimonials documents the author’s mystical experiences with the Eucharist in her Episcopal Church.

Relevent to this discussion:

voice from the tabernacle, vision at High Mass, angels at Mass, many experiences with strong odor of incense or various flowers either coming from the tabernacle or accompanying the Episcopal priest to her bedside

Most heart touching, one evening she became aware of the Lord’s grief and begged for an explanation. Finally she heard the Lord say, “It is one of my priests and then"ONe of My priests is going to shame and humiliate Me beyond all bounds, tomorro.”

The following morning her rector (Pastor) resigned his cure to become Roman Catholic, denying his Anglican orders.
I was willing to give the benefit of the doubt and take it under mild consideration until I saw the last line. Clearly an example of a touched mind and appealing to a niche book market. 😉

James
Click to expand...
 
Very old book '40’s. A couple Anglican bishops wrote supportive testimonials.

One of the other intersting mystical experiences came about when the author was about to loose her cool and comment on some Roman criticism of her church. The Lord stopped her saying something like: my body has been battered enough.

Personally, I don’t think the Lord gets much into these controversies of ecclesiology, though I know well that many Anglicans have been deeply troubled about Roman controversies with Anglican orders & spent much time seeking answers in prayer.

Their experience is invariably that the Lord doesn’t react strongly to the underlying theology, perhaps to particular situations, but not the theology.

In one of my
A & M classes I was taught to be very leary of any locution where the Lord seemed to spell out theology. He just doesn’t talk like that.
 
I may not be able to explain this in the best manner and what I mean to say and what you think I said may Differ. But here Goes.

The ELCA Lutheran church does believe that they have a Eucharist. We beleive that the Eucharist is the body and blood of christ because scripture says it to be. This is my body and this is my Blood. The Bread and wine become the eucharist because the word becomes flesh. When we partake in communion it then becomes the body and blood of Christ. The very body and blood of Christ Spoken of in John 6:53.

I know most who read this post will disagree with it’s validity however that is what I believe and I hope your posts will not be in a threating manner. I was a cradle Catholic. I can say from a stong christian faith I feel That every Sunday as I partake in the Eucharist in my Lutheran Church the Holy Spirit is there and that Jesus is indeed present in the Eucharist. I also feel that I was lead by the Holy spirit to The Lutheran Church and I have never felt more at home after all these years.
 
That’s a good point. Just because a Lutheran Minister usually–there are some lines of succession in a few Lutheran groups I’ve heard–doesn’t have apostolic succession doesn’t mean God can’t choose to act in spite of not being bound to act.

The sacrament is a covenant guarantee. But there is nothing to prevent God in His goodness from providing graces He is not bound by covenant to supply EVEN when no Eucharist actually occurs. There may be many graces gratuitously given during a non-sacramental protestant Communion service, merely because people ask God and He is gracious.

I’ve seen the same thing with women’s ordination. I strictly oppose it; at best I am uncertain a woman’s attempt at orders are valid. But I have seen much grace come through such services.

In general, though, I find groups that have lost orders tend to experience less value in the Communion service and it becomes less and less important in their thought.
 
I’ve yet to see a signboard in front of a church

[sign] INVALID EUCHARIST
COME ON IN!
[/sign]

The point being that no one would every have a Communion service that they would believe is invalid, unless they are unaware of how hypocritical such an action would be.

Jesus meets us where we are at, not where we think He should meet other people (making a special exception for ourselves).
 
Truthstalker said:
I’ve yet to see a signboard in front of a church

[sign] INVALID EUCHARIST
COME ON IN!
[/sign]

The point being that no one would every have a Communion service that they would believe is invalid, unless they are unaware of how hypocritical such an action would be.

Jesus meets us where we are at, not where we think He should meet other people (making a special exception for ourselves).
Click to expand...
Good Point
 
GKC said:
I think the gist of the OP was that there cannot be such miracles absent a valid priesthood to confect the sacrament. This is irrespective of the opinions relative to transubstantiation.

GKC
Click to expand...
See, I don’t get that. From what I understand re: Catholic teaching on eucharistic theology: No, we don’t recognize eucharists confected by laymen (which is what all Anglican Priests are assumed to be by the Catholic Church). We all know that and it’s been rehashed ad nauseum. Of course the possibility of valid orders being ‘injected’ into the Anglican orders by Old Catholic and PNCC Bishops muddies those waters slightly.

Also, I’m pretty sure that the Church recognizes that such non-valid eucharists can be a source of Grace for those who participate, and therefore, if God wanted to use that as a vehicle for a miraculous occurence, I don’t think that would be outside the bounds of what Catholicism teaches as possible. So I don’t really see the problem, even though I understand what the OP was getting at.
 
chris_molter said:
See, I don’t get that. From what I understand re: Catholic teaching on eucharistic theology: No, we don’t recognize eucharists confected by laymen (which is what all Anglican Priests are assumed to be by the Catholic Church). We all know that and it’s been rehashed ad nauseum. Of course the possibility of valid orders being ‘injected’ into the Anglican orders by Old Catholic and PNCC Bishops muddies those waters slightly.

Also, I’m pretty sure that the Church recognizes that such non-valid eucharists can be a source of Grace for those who participate, and therefore, if God wanted to use that as a vehicle for a miraculous occurence, I don’t think that would be outside the bounds of what Catholicism teaches as possible. So I don’t really see the problem, even though I understand what the OP was getting at.
Click to expand...
In which case, the same logic would appear to suggest that a Baptist communion of the Lord’s Supper could manifest a miraculous appearance of the Precious Blood, from the grape juice. That is, there would not be a “necessity” (which, assuming the miraculous, seems logical) for a “priest”, or for any form of the standard eucharistic setting. The Body or Blood could appear in any place whatever that the elements (whatever they might be) were offered (in whatever form). The confecting of the sacrament, whether validly and effectively, or invalidly and without effect, is then not the point.

Or so it seems to me you are saying. If a eucharistic miracle (beyond the customary) might occur at the hands of a layman (invalid orders, or no orders), it would seem that which layman, believing what, and doing what to what matter, is irrelevant.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top