Catholic taking Lutheran Educ. Class w/wife

[Contarini]

My experience with the Episcopal Church was that the Eucharist was open to “all baptised Christians”. I had thought that was true also of the United Methodist Church, but it appears that the Methodists don’t even require that you be baptised? Am I reading you correctly, Edwin?

Right. This is controversial–some Methodist liturgists are trying to change it, but it is the standard practice to invite everyone, although the liturgy makes it clear of course that you should be repentant of your sins and have faith in Christ. The roots of this are in Wesley’s controversy with people who insisted on a conversion experience as a prerequisite for communion.

Many Episcopal priests also refuse to have any preconditions, but at least in the Episcopal Church this is not (yet) the official stance. This is one of the other controversies that has been buried by the homosexual issue.

Edwin

 

[mercygate]

My experience with the Episcopal Church was that the Eucharist was open to “all baptised Christians”. I had thought that was true also of the United Methodist Church, but it appears that the Methodists don’t even require that you be baptised? Am I reading you correctly, Edwin?

Open Communion of baptized Christians in the Episcopal Church was unthinkable until 20-30 years ago. The current move toward admitting non-Christians to the table is incomprehensible.

 

[Contarini]

Open Communion of baptized Christians in the Episcopal Church was unthinkable until 20-30 years ago. The current move toward admitting non-Christians to the table is incomprehensible.

I don’t find it incomprehensible. Just deeply wrong and misguided!

Edwin

 

[mercygate]

I don’t find it incomprehensible. Just deeply wrong and misguided!

Edwin

Well, since I no longer have a pony in that race, I chose to be cautious in my phrasing. I would not contradict your judgment in the matter.

 

[chworkman05]

But Catholics say the same thing about Lutherans.

yes you are correct

Not in as strong a form as Lutherans, no. A recent UMC statement on the subject is here. (See the top of p. 13, for instance.) I admit that it’s pretty vague, and that many Methodists aren’t aware of and/or don’t agree even with what this document says.

verry vuage. makes one question theology and convition.

Well, we probably disagree on what “drinking to one’s own damnation” means. I wonder if Lutherans in Germany who insisted on the Real Presence but uncritically supported tyrannical rulers were not “drinking to their own damnation.”

possibly. I guess it would depend on context. I don’s know.

I don’t think it refers to one’s theological beliefs about the nature of communion. I support the Methodist practice of offering communion to all Christians. The common Methodist practice of offering communion to everyone, baptized or not, is a different matter. Insofar as some liberal Methodists have no problem offering communion to non-Christians, this is a valid reason for you to question whether having intercommunion with Methodists is a good idea, because one has to ask whether those particular Methodists have any idea about what communion is. However, if you read This Holy Mystery and other official Methodist documents, you will see that the rationale for this practice is the view that the Eucharist can be a “converting ordinance.”

This is a verry dangerouse practise and a verry bad idea.
hense drinking to ones own damanation (possibly)

It is not that people who have no faith in Christ are invited, but that people are invited to come to Christ in the Eucharist, and if they are not baptized they are to be baptized as soon as possible afterward. I have a problem with this practice, but I do not see it as a reason for not having intercommunion with Methodists. Arguably it rests on a very strong understanding of the sacrament as a means of grace–one that tallies well with Luther’s teaching

.
This I do view as a reason not to share in pulpet fellowship or intercommunion. Yes the sacrament is a means of grace, but one needs to understand the sacrament and what it is or one could be drinking to there own damnation.

Edwin

 

[jean8]

But Catholics say the same thing about Lutherans.

Not in as strong a form as Lutherans, no. A recent UMC statement on the subject is here. (See the top of p. 13, for instance.) I admit that it’s pretty vague, and that many Methodists aren’t aware of and/or don’t agree even with what this document says.

Well, we probably disagree on what “drinking to one’s own damnation” means. I wonder if Lutherans in Germany who insisted on the Real Presence but uncritically supported tyrannical rulers were not “drinking to their own damnation.”
I don’t think it refers to one’s theological beliefs about the nature of communion. I support the Methodist practice of offering communion to all Christians. The common Methodist practice of offering communion to everyone, baptized or not, is a different matter. Insofar as some liberal Methodists have no problem offering communion to non-Christians, this is a valid reason for you to question whether having intercommunion with Methodists is a good idea, because one has to ask whether those particular Methodists have any idea about what communion is. However, if you read This Holy Mystery and other official Methodist documents, you will see that the rationale for this practice is the view that the Eucharist can be a “converting ordinance.” It is not that people who have no faith in Christ are invited, but that people are invited to come to Christ in the Eucharist, and if they are not baptized they are to be baptized as soon as possible afterward. I have a problem with this practice, but I do not see it as a reason for not having intercommunion with Methodists. Arguably it rests on a very strong understanding of the sacrament as a means of grace–one that tallies well with Luther’s teaching.

Edwin

How do Methodists refer to the Eucharist?
Do they say it’s an Ordinance. Do they believe in the real presence ? How often is this sacrament celebrated in the Methodist church?
Just curious.

God bless,
jean8

 

[Pinkyyy]

Oh yeah, another thing I thought of during the class. The pastor mentioned the burning bush, ten commandments and moses. He asked if we knew why God told Moses to take his shoes off. He said because God said the ground was holy. Holy because God was there and nothing God dwelled on or in could be unpure or unholy. This made me wonder if Lutherans believe in the Immaculate Conception. Does anyone know?

I think it’s great that you want to know about the Lutheran faith and compare it to your religion, and get to know what her beliefs are. I also like the idea of her going next year to RCIA (not pressuring her to convert, but so that she can understand about Catholicism - and if you do so, the priest should know ahead of time that this is for educational purposes, not for conversion).

About the immaculate conception…I am assuming you are referring to Mary (some think it refers to Jesus) and that she was free from original sin and all sin - no Lutherans do not believe this.

It is good you are rooted in your faith. Remember not to get defensive as this is very easy to do!!! It’s easy to find some “small” belief and before you know it, it’s a BIG argument. Keep an open mind and good for you guys for trying to learn about each other’s faith. I really believe if you guys are open and care about eachother’s beliefs, then this can be very good for you and your future children!

 

[Contarini]

How do Methodists refer to the Eucharist?

Depends. Most often as “Holy Communion,” in my experience–sometimes also “The Lord’s Supper” or “Eucharist.” I believe the 1989 Hymnal mentions “Mass” as another term that Christians use, but Methodists don’t generally use it!

Do they say it’s an Ordinance.

That is certainly a word Methodists might use. But Methodists more typically refer to it as a sacrament. (This is with the caveat that many Methodists have been deeply influenced by less Catholic traditions, and you find many pastors who don’t teach as as strong a doctrine of the Eucharist as official UM liturgy implies.)

Do they believe in the real presence ?

Traditionally they believe in a “spiritual presence” of the kind taught by Calvin. I.e., more than just a symbol or a presence in our hearts, but not a bodily presence that can be localized in the elements themselves. However, many Methodists in the 19th century came to see it as just a symbol–but the more sacramental approach has had a revival in recent decades, and you will find Methodists who actually have a more Catholic view of the Eucharist than the one I described above.

How often is this sacrament celebrated in the Methodist church?

The 1989 Hymnal, which is the official United Methodist liturgy, strongly implies that a weekly celebration should be normative. However, this is generally only the case in larger churches where there may be an early service with weekly communion (similar to Anglican practice of an earlier era), and in some “high church” congregations. Monthly communion is the most common practice in my experience. My wife (who is both a United Methodist and a scholar of Methodist history) tells me that at one time quarterly communion was more common, and I believe it is still practiced in some parts of the UMC.

Note that this applies to the United Methodist Church, which is the largest Methodist body in the United States and has a strong international presence. But there are other Methodist churches in the U.S., and British and other forms of Methodism are somewhat different in certain ways, though they are all in full communion with each other.

Edwin

Edwin

 

[jean8]

Dude,

If you’re in a Lutheran church which teaches OSAS, you’re not really in a Lutheran church.

But we have to be careful here; what was being taught?

An objective faith in the finished work of Christ and an acceptance of the idea that our righteousness is from Him and therefore we may not boast? Or was he actually teaching that believers cannot make shipwreck of their faith?

What is OSAS?

jean8

 

[mercygate]

What is OSAS?

jean8

Once Saved, Always Saved. aka: Eternal Security.

 

[nebula]

This morning I went to a Lutheran (Missouri Synod) education class with my wife. She grew up Lutheran and is wanting a refresher. I am Catholic and would classify myself as strong in my faith, but still have much to learn. Two main reasons why I plan on attending this class with my wife. 1) Since we are now “one” in marrigage, I want to learn some of the faith of my other “part.” 2) I feel it will strengthen my own Catholic faith. When a Lutheran teaching is discussed, I will investigate the Catholic teaching on the same issue. I would like to do a lot of the investigation on this forum. Does this seem reasonable, and would you all be willing to help me with questions I might have?

Today was the very first class. The Bible Alone was mentioned just in passing and so was OSAS. No questions were raised in my mind this morning regarding those issues. The pastor asked if anyone could explain what a Saint is. I definitely could have, but for whatever reason, I didn’t raise my hand. He went on to explain that a Saint is someone who lives a holy life, dies and then canonized by the Catholic Church. I raised my hand and added that the Catholic Church also teaches that anyone that makes it to Heaven is a Saint and that we should all strive to live saintly lives while on this Earth. He said okay. He went on to say that we should view ourselves as Saints already. In a round about way, he based this on OSAS.

The pastor quoted Leviticus 19:1-2 saying that when God said, “Speak to the whole Israelite community and tell them: Be holy, for I, the LORD your God, am holy”, that God wasn’t commandingus to be holy, but He was making us holy. Hopefully, I’ve articulated his point. Is the Catholic teaching the same as the pastors’?

Do you think this is a good idea for me to join my wife in this class? Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

-Greg****

Greg,

I love taking those classes. I took a Lutheran adult education class when I was a Mormon, as did I take a Catholic adult education class. There’s nothing wrong with learning, and through comparison you’ll no doubt grow a stronger understanding of your own faith and have productive conversations with your wife.

 

[jean8]

Right. This is controversial–some Methodist liturgists are trying to change it, but it is the standard practice to invite everyone, although the liturgy makes it clear of course that you should be repentant of your sins and have faith in Christ. The roots of this are in Wesley’s controversy with people who insisted on a conversion experience as a prerequisite for communion.

Many Episcopal priests also refuse to have any preconditions, but at least in the Episcopal Church this is not (yet) the official stance. This is one of the other controversies that has been buried by the homosexual issue.

Edwin

They also go against scripture and ordain women.


jean8

 

[Contarini]

They also go against scripture and ordain women.

Naturally we disagree that this is against Scripture, and the point is not relevant to the question I was asked.

Edwin