Inter-Communion with Protestants

[hn160]

I fear you have been taught wrongly. As has oft been discussed here.

GKC

It is like beating a dead horse on this site over the issue of Lutherans and Consubstantiation. Some Catholics only want to believe the myths spread by Calvanist over the Lutheran belief in the Real Presence.

 

[SteveVH]

It is like beating a dead horse on this site over the issue of Lutherans and Consubstantiation. Some Catholics only want to believe the myths spread by Calvanist over the Lutheran belief in the Real Presence.

I don’t really have a problem with the Lutheran stance of remaining silent in the face of such a great mystery. I understand that it is a belief in the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist without an attempt to explain it and I actually admire that view in some ways.

What I don’t understand is those Lutherans who profess this belief in the real presence and yet treat the elements remaining after the liturgy as nothing more than common bread and wine. This has been discussed, but still makes one wonder what the words “true presence” really mean to them.

 

[hn160]

I don’t really have a problem with the Lutheran stance of remaining silent in the face of such a great mystery. I understand that it is a belief in the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist without an attempt to explain it and I actually admire that view in some ways.

What I don’t understand is those Lutherans who profess this belief in the real presence and yet treat the elements remaining after the liturgy as nothing more than common bread and wine. This has been discussed, but still makes one wonder what the words “true presence” really mean to them.

That is not how they are treated at my church.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

I don’t really have a problem with the Lutheran stance of remaining silent in the face of such a great mystery. I understand that it is a belief in the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist without an attempt to explain it and I actually admire that view in some ways.

What I don’t understand is those Lutherans who profess this belief in the real presence and yet treat the elements remaining after the liturgy as nothing more than common bread and wine. This has been discussed, but still makes one wonder what the words “true presence” really mean to them.

Excellent point, Steve. Whenever the distortion of ‘receptionism’ is officially confronted and denounced yet we hear of some Lutherans mixing the consecrated host with unconsecrated. The LCMS addressed this false teaching not long ago. A parish pastor is fully responsible for the sacraments and must be held accountable if the consecrated elements are not fully consumed during or shortly after Mass to reserve them. An ELCA pastor friend told me recently that he wisely moved the ciborium from the sacristy to the retable of the main altar with votive light while awaiting the construction of an ambry as a visual reminder to his parishioners of the Real Presence.

 

[JonNC]

Edwin I believe when you learn exactly why we do what we do, you are going to see that it is always in the best interest of everyone involved.

A huge reason I believe communion is (name removed by moderator)ossible is forgiveness of sins.

God told us to confess our sins.

If we were to confess them to God ourself and not to the Priests why did he give them the authority to bind or loose sin.

What would be the reason? If we were to go to God ourself. We are told to confess our sins to one another, and confess by word of mouth.

Also God gave the Priest the authority to forgive sin in his name or hold it bound. How can anyone know the mind of God to be sure it is held or forgiven?

By God telling the Apostles what you bind is bound and what you loose is loose tells us all sin is not forgiven. So unless you are told you are forgiven how can you go before God in the Eucharist when you don’t know?

Who can say they know the mind of God.

God promised us when we confess to a Priest he has authority from God to speak in his name.

So back to the point. How could a Protestant know if his sin is bound or loose. He would have to guess right? or claim to have the power to forgive sin in Gods name. or know the mind of God.
All sin is not forgiven, If it was sin could not be held bound.

Hi rinnie,
I won’t go into consubstantiation since the issueas been well cleared up by others here, but on confession/Absolution:

A Lutheran will know his/her sins are forgiven when the pastor says, “As a called and ordained servant of Christ and by His authority, I therefore forgive you all of your sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”

Jon

 

[rinnie]

NO.

Lutherans reject ALL Aristotelian attempts to explain away the miracle that occurs at the Eucharist, including Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation. Lutherans believe Christ’s body to be truly and completely present once the Words of Institution have been spoken. How this happens and how our senses still perceive bread to be present - we acknowledge to be a mystery, and do not attempt to explain it. Some call our view Sacramental Union, though it could just as accurately be called “Sacramental Mystery.”

Some Anglicans, yes.* Some* Anglicans, no. Search the boards for common Anglican beliefs. There’s a certain word that is commonly used to describe the beliefs held by Christians of that communion…

I apologize and only stated what I could find on the internet. I had no one to truly ask.

But with that aside I guess I would have to say we could not participate in one anothers communion because you reject Transubstantiation? That would probally be the best answer I could come up with. Simply because we must accept what our Church teaches. Again I don’t know.

Angilicans I guess would reject Trans. also? Like I said I must apologize I truly don;t know. ‘’

But I believe if we can’t even agree on the teaching of the Eucharist itself, it would be even worse for others to accept our teachings in order to receive it.

With that said if we both agree that you must have absolution from a Ordained Priest to be forgiven, I truly don’t know what the big difference would be, except the teaching itself.

I only know there has to be something I am missing or there would be no problem for us to receive the Sacrament together.

 

[JonNC]

=rinnie;11363342]I apologize and only stated what I could find on the internet. I had no one to truly ask.

You could have asked me.

But with that aside I guess I would have to say we could not participate in one anothers communion because you reject Transubstantiation? That would probally be the best answer I could come up with. Simply because we must accept what our Church teaches. Again I don’t know.

I would say it is broader than that. We don’t participate in each other’s communion because we are not in communion with each other. For confessional Lutherans, and as I understand it, Catholics, Eucharistic hospitality requires more than agreement on the sacrament, but general doctrinal agreement.

Angilicans I guess would reject Trans. also? Like I said I must apologize I truly don;t know. ‘’

Some do, some don’t.

But I believe if we can’t even agree on the teaching of the Eucharist itself, it would be even worse for others to accept our teachings in order to receive it.

Recent Lutheran / Catholic dialogue seems to indicate that Transubstantiation vs. Sacramental Union might not be Church dividing. It is not Transubstantiation that keeps me out of the Catholic Church. Reformed beliefs on the Real Presence, OTOH, would keep me out of those churches.

Jon

 

[rinnie]

You could have asked me.

I would say it is broader than that. We don’t participate in each other’s communion because we are not in communion with each other. For confessional Lutherans, and as I understand it, Catholics, Eucharistic hospitality requires more than agreement on the sacrament, but general doctrinal agreement.

Some do, some don’t.

Recent Lutheran / Catholic dialogue seems to indicate that Transubstantiation vs. Sacramental Union might not be Church dividing. It is not Transubstantiation that keeps me out of the Catholic Church. Reformed beliefs on the Real Presence, OTOH, would keep me out of those churches.

Jon

Okay Jon, here is where I am confused. If what I read is correct we pretty much believe that it is the actual bread and body of Christ. Okay now.

If again what I have read is correct you guys feel this is a complete mystery of how it happens, but accept that it happens.

Now if that is true, and you just feel its a mystery, and the RCC teaches how it happens, you don’t exactly know how it happens since its a mystery, why reject the RCC teaching if you can’t say its false either.

Unless I am say out in left field here, and am very misled here.

Now forgive my ignorance once again, but you do indeed have a Priest with valid Holy Orders to forgive sin the same as us Correct?

 

[JonNC]

=rinnie;11363439]Okay Jon, here is where I am confused. If what I read is correct we pretty much believe that it is the actual bread and body of Christ. Okay now.

I think you meant the actual body and blood of Christ. Yes. We agree.

If again what I have read is correct you guys feel this is a complete mystery of how it happens, but accept that it happens.

Now if that is true, and you just feel its a mystery, and the RCC teaches how it happens, you don’t exactly know how it happens since its a mystery, why reject the RCC teaching if you can’t say its false either.

Not that it is false, from my POV. Even the confessions dismiss it as sophistical. IOW, a teaching that isn’t necessary, and in fact can’t be proved from scripture. IOW, Christ does not speak to us using metaphysical language, but simply tells us, “This is my body”.

Now forgive my ignorance once again, but you do indeed have a Priest with valid Holy Orders to forgive sin the same as us Correct?

Yes, and we have no doubt that our pastors, whether in Apostolic Succession, or by presbyter ordination, are indeed valid. The Catholic Church will disagree.

Jon

 

[Peter_J]

I apologize and only stated what I could find on the internet. I had no one to truly ask.

Good point. Question-asking is allowed around here.

 

[JonNC]

Good point. Question-asking is allowed around here.

Oddly enough, there have been times I’ve wondered off to other sites to find out something about the CC, when I could have asked you, or guanophore, or Randy Carson, or a large group of other Catholics I trust here.

Jon

 

[batman1973]

I was told by my pastor that the bread and wine we take for communion is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. That’s good enough for me. I dont care to have the mystery explained away.

 

[GKC]

I apologize and only stated what I could find on the internet. I had no one to truly ask.

But with that aside I guess I would have to say we could not participate in one anothers communion because you reject Transubstantiation? That would probally be the best answer I could come up with. Simply because we must accept what our Church teaches. Again I don’t know.

Angilicans I guess would reject Trans. also? Like I said I must apologize I truly don;t know. ‘’

But I believe if we can’t even agree on the teaching of the Eucharist itself, it would be even worse for others to accept our teachings in order to receive it.

With that said if we both agree that you must have absolution from a Ordained Priest to be forgiven, I truly don’t know what the big difference would be, except the teaching itself.

I only know there has to be something I am missing or there would be no problem for us to receive the Sacrament together.

Some Anglicans affirm trans substantiation. Some do not, while affirming the real presence, Sort of like Lutherans, those latter. Some hold to a symbolic presence. To find out what a given Anglican affirms, one must ask.

GKC

 

[rinnie]

I think you meant the actual body and blood of Christ. Yes. We agree.

Not that it is false, from my POV. Even the confessions dismiss it as sophistical. IOW, a teaching that isn’t necessary, and in fact can’t be proved from scripture. IOW, Christ does not speak to us using metaphysical language, but simply tells us, “This is my body”.

Yes, and we have no doubt that our pastors, whether in Apostolic Succession, or by presbyter ordination, are indeed valid. The Catholic Church will disagree.

Jon

Okay now is Apostolic Succession can be proven why does the CC disagree?

 

[EvangelCatholic]

A caution to Lutherans from Catholics, per Lutheran-Roman Catholic International Commission on Unity

1. In their ecumenical dialogue, Lutherans and Catholics could both benefit
   from insights of the liturgical movement and new theological insights.
   Through the retrieval of the notion of anamnesis, both have been
   led to a better understanding of how the sacrament of the eucharist as
   a memorial effectively makes present the events of salvation and, in
   particular, the sacrifice of Christ. Catholics could appreciate the many
   forms of Christ’s presence within the liturgy of the eucharist, such as
   his presence in his word and in the assembly (SC 7). In light of the ineffability
   of the mystery of eucharist, Catholics have learned to reevaluate
   diverse expressions of faith in the real presence of Jesus Christ in
   the sacrament. Lutherans gained a new awareness of the reasons to
   deal respectfully with the blessed elements after the celebration.
2. While the Council of Trent defended the practice of adoration of the
   Blessed Sacrament, it took as its starting point that the primary purpose
   of the eucharist is the communion of the faithful. The eucharist was instituted
   by Christ to be consumed as spiritual food.49

lutheranworld.org/sites/default/files/From%20Conflict%20to%20Communion.pdf

Recent meeting of Lutherans with Francis: ecumenicalnews.com/news/from-conflict-to-communion-lutheranroman-catholic-common-commemoration-of-the-reformation-in-2017

 

[JonNC]

I was told by my pastor that the bread and wine we take for communion is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. That’s good enough for me. I dont care to have the mystery explained away.

Indeed, as St. John of Damascus states: *And now you ask how the bread becomes the body of Christ, and the wine and the water become the blood of Christ. I shall tell you. The Holy Spirit comes upon them, and achieves things which surpass every word and thought…let it be enough for you to understand that this takes place by the Holy Spirit. *

Jon

 

[batman1973]

Indeed, as St. John of Damascus states: *And now you ask how the bread becomes the body of Christ, and the wine and the water become the blood of Christ. I shall tell you. The Holy Spirit comes upon them, and achieves things which surpass every word and thought…let it be enough for you to understand that this takes place by the Holy Spirit. *

Jon