Is Christ present in the Eucharist in other Christian denominations?

[Little_One0307]

I had to write back to this. Whether a Catholic believes in the Real Presence of Christ does not change the fact that Christ is made truly and really present on the Altar in every sacrifice of the Mass. By the same token if a non-catholic ecclesial community wants to believe that Jesus is present in their Communion does not change the fact that Jesus is not present in their communion.

I needed to make a clarfication on this post last night. The Eastern Orthodox Church has valid Sacrments which means Christ is present on the Altar in their Divine Litrugy. I read another post that said there were some other exceptions.

I needed to post this lest I mislead anyone by the sentence quoted above. It was not my intention.

God bless.

 

[Rolltide]

This is one of the reasons I left the Catholic Church. I’ve never seen a logical, rational argument that made a case that the real presence could not take place outside the Catholic Church or that God would have a reason for not allowing such to take place. Simply my own opinion, I don’t seek is change anyone’s mind.

However, it should be noted that besides the examples of denominations I stated above that DO have valid Eucharists, only the Lutherans and some Anglicans really would care in the first place. Virtually all of the other denominations believe that the Communion is symbolic, so the point is really moot. None of them believe in the Real Presence to begin with.

In essence, this means that as a practical reality, the vast majority of denominations that believe in the Real Presence are receiving a valid Eucharist.

 

[valentino]

There all Catholic churches aren’t they?

 

[valentino]

This is one of the reasons I left the Catholic Church. I’ve never seen a logical, rational argument that made a case that the real presence could not take place outside the Catholic Church or that God would have a reason for not allowing such to take place. Simply my own opinion, I don’t seek is change anyone’s mind.

It makes logical sense if you believe that Christ instituted the CC and is its founder.

 

[Rolltide]

There all Catholic churches aren’t they?

No… although each of those churches has an Eastern Catholic counterpart that IS in union with the pope.

 

[Jim_Roberts]

The Eastern Orthodox Churches have completely valid Sacraments including Holy Communion. Christ is fully present in the Orthodox Divine Liturgy just as He is at Catholic Mass or Catholic Divine Liturgy.

There are other groups that the Church says do have valid apostolic succession and therefore valid Sacraments. I know the Old Catholic churches are one, there may be a few others. I’ll let others that know more discuss those.

This might be better placed in the Non-Catholic religions forum.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Christ is truly present in the Catholic Church. It was instituted by Christ, the priests have the power indelible] mark on their soull for life. What other denomination can you walk in any church and CHrist is present?

 

[Rolltide]

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Christ is truly present in the Catholic Church. It was instituted by Christ, the priests have the power indelible] mark on their soull for life. What other denomination can you walk in any church and CHrist is present?

Well… the various Orthodox Churches, for one… They are schismatic, NOT heretical.

 

[davidrussell11]

My answer is Only Catholics celebrate the Eucharist. Catholics believe that Jesus is truly present under the appearances of bread and wine. Other christian denominations may have a ‘communion service’ in which they reenact the Last supper, but they believe that the Eucharist is a symbol of Jesus, not truly Jesus Himself.
This is my thought as i am an artist.If you like my post please appreciate for that and let me know if there is any other topic.

Ron Dicianni

 

[VivaCristoRey27]

My answer is Only Catholics celebrate the Eucharist. Catholics believe that Jesus is truly present under the appearances of bread and wine. Other christian denominations may have a ‘communion service’ in which they reenact the Last supper, but they believe that the Eucharist is a symbol of Jesus, not truly Jesus Himself.
This is my thought as i am an artist.If you like my post please appreciate for that and let me know if there is any other topic.

Ron Dicianni

That is one Protestant view. All Protestants (save for Anglo-Catholics, who eschew the “Protestant” label) deny that the Mass is a Sacrifice, but some believe that Jesus is somehow, for some length of time, in some manner, present in their communion celebrations. Luther, for instance, famously argued with Zwingli on this point (who denied the nature of the Sacraments), pounding his fist on the table and shouting “Est! Est! Est!” (as in “Hoc est enim Corpus Meum” – “This is My Body”). But Luther also denied that the Mass is a Sacrifice and claimed that anyone could celebrate it.

Because they lack a valid priesthood, without a doubt, Jesus is not materially present in Protestant communions, but it also may be possible that some Protestants make a Spiritual Communion when they partake of their bread and wine with the intention of receiving Christ even though they do not make a Sacramental Communion. This would be the same as a Catholic who made a Spiritual Communion because they could not receive a Sacramental Communion due to being in mortal sin, not fasting, or not being physically present (such as watching Mass on TV or kneeling in the fields when the bell tolls to mark the Consecration). It is not as beneficial as Sacramental Communion, of course, but it still gives Grace.

 

[Rolltide]

My answer is Only Catholics celebrate the Eucharist. Catholics believe that Jesus is truly present under the appearances of bread and wine. Other christian denominations may have a ‘communion service’ in which they reenact the Last supper, but they believe that the Eucharist is a symbol of Jesus, not truly Jesus Himself.
This is my thought as i am an artist.If you like my post please appreciate for that and let me know if there is any other topic.

Ron Dicianni

You would be wrong. Both the Second Vatican Council and several popes have recognized that all seven sacraments in the Orthodox Church are valid.

See the declaration stated in Lumen Gentium from the Second Vatican Council. The declaration was further reiterated in 1995, when Pope John Paul II issued Ut Unam Sint:

Ut Unam Sint
Chapter 1, part 12:
"12. The same Dogmatic Constitution listed at length “the elements of sanctification and truth” which in various ways are present and operative beyond the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: “For there are many who honour Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and of action, and who show a true religious zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, Son of God and Saviour. They are consecrated by Baptism, through which they are united with Christ. They also recognize and receive other sacraments within their own Churches or Ecclesial Communities. Many of them rejoice in the episcopate, celebrate the Holy Eucharist, and cultivate devotion towards the Virgin Mother of God. They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits. Likewise, we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them also he gives his gifts and graces, and is thereby operative among them with his sanctifying power. Some indeed he has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood. In all of Christ’s disciples the Spirit arouses the desire to be peacefully united, in the manner determined by Christ, as one flock under one shepherd”.15

The Council’s Decree on Ecumenism, referring to the Orthodox Churches, went so far as to declare that “through the celebration of the Eucharist of the Lord in each of these Churches, the Church of God is built up and grows in stature”.16 Truth demands that all this be recognized."

 

[VivaCristoRey27]

Well… the various Orthodox Churches, for one… They are schismatic, NOT heretical.

That’s debatable, particularly with regards to the Oriental Orthodox (Monophysites) and the Syrian Orthodox (Nestorians). Just because someone calls themselves “Orthodox” doesn’t mean they are. After all, remember each of these groups – Syrian Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Eastern Orthodox all labelled themselves “Orthodox” in contradistinction to the Catholic Church, claiming we were heretical. For instance, the Oriental Orthodox split off of the Catholic Church, claiming that we had embraced the Nestorian heresy because we affirmed the truth that Christ has two natures. The Oriental Orthodox consider the Syrian Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox to be heretics and the Eastern Orthodox likewise consider the Oriental Orthodox and Syrian Orthodox to be heretics so you really can’t lump them all together into “the various Orthodox Churches”.

The Eastern Orthodox did not split off over doctrinal matters as the result of an Ecumenical Council, like the Syrian Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox did. So sometimes they are referred to as heretics (primarily for denying the dual-procession of the Holy Ghost, though they also deny several other dogmas defined after the schism) but are mostly referred to as schismatics and have been treated as such historically.

Anyway, this is largely irrelevant. Someone can be a heretic and still have a valid Mass, as long as they are a valid priest and still utilize a valid form and matter and intend to consecrate the Eucharist. But every time a Sacrament is celebrated outside the Church, even if it is valid, it is sacrilegious and therefore offends God rather than pleasing Him.

 

[Bigcat71]

I’m not sure… I know that Lutherans claim to have the Real Presence of Christ in their Eucharist, but I’ve heard some say they are wrong. This is why I would never receive communion at a Lutheran Church. If I am unsure and I receive I am approaching the table in an unworthy manner. I respect their belief and I am certain that it is possible for Christ to be present, so I prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt, while retaining my doubt about their Communion. The Catholic Church says no, so I wouldn’t receive It. I will however respect their belief and will wait till Judgement Day to see what Jesus says about it.

I know with absolute certainty that my Church’s Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus. Beyond that, I can’t judge…

… but that’s just me

God bless

Lutherans are all over the board on this issue. Some believe that He is present, others believe he is present in a spiritual way and still others believe, as do most other protestant groups that communion is merely an act that commemorates the Last Supper and nothing more. A communally shared meal. The Lutheran sect is far from monolithic and has deep divisions withing it. Very deep indeed.

 

[ConstantineTG]

That’s debatable, particularly with regards to the Oriental Orthodox (Monophysites) and the Syrian Orthodox (Nestorians). Just because someone calls themselves “Orthodox” doesn’t mean they are. After all, remember each of these groups – Syrian Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Eastern Orthodox all labelled themselves “Orthodox” in contradistinction to the Catholic Church, claiming we were heretical. For instance, the Oriental Orthodox split off of the Catholic Church, claiming that we had embraced the Nestorian heresy because we affirmed the truth that Christ has two natures. The Oriental Orthodox consider the Syrian Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox to be heretics and the Eastern Orthodox likewise consider the Oriental Orthodox and Syrian Orthodox to be heretics so you really can’t lump them all together into “the various Orthodox Churches”.

The Eastern Orthodox did not split off over doctrinal matters as the result of an Ecumenical Council, like the Syrian Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox did. So sometimes they are referred to as heretics (primarily for denying the dual-procession of the Holy Ghost, though they also deny several other dogmas defined after the schism) but are mostly referred to as schismatics and have been treated as such historically.

Anyway, this is largely irrelevant. Someone can be a heretic and still have a valid Mass, as long as they are a valid priest and still utilize a valid form and matter and intend to consecrate the Eucharist. But every time a Sacrament is celebrated outside the Church, even if it is valid, it is sacrilegious and therefore offends God rather than pleasing Him.

Ironically though, of those groups the only one we have inter-Communion with are the Assyrian Church of the East. The Pope has allowed inter-Communion between them and Chaldean Catholics in their traditional territory because they are heavily persecuted there.

So surely at this point the Catholic Church no longer sees the ACotE as heretics. Otherwise we wouldn’t have accepted inter-Communion with them.

 

[Rolltide]

Ironically though, of those groups the only one we have inter-Communion with are the Assyrian Church of the East. The Pope has allowed inter-Communion between them and Chaldean Catholics in their traditional territory because they are heavily persecuted there.

So surely at this point the Catholic Church no longer sees the ACotE as heretics. Otherwise we wouldn’t have accepted inter-Communion with them.

A large group (an entire diocese) of the Assyrian Church of the East just came back into Communion with the Catholic Church around 2008. Talks for reunification have been going better with that church than just about any other group.

 

[ConstantineTG]

A large group (an entire diocese) of the Assyrian Church of the East just came back into Communion with the Catholic Church around 2008. Talks for reunification have been going better with that church than just about any other group.

Not to put a bad light on it, but their survival literally depends on it. Their home lands are Iraq and Iran, Islamic countries. They are heavily persecuted. I have the pleasure of knowing a Chaldean Catholic priest, and he has some awesome stories of people fighting for their faith in Iraq. Hopefully they all return to communion with the Bishop of Rome soon.

 

[DAAVEED1590]

What does the Catholic Church teach about the Eucharist in other Christian denominations who believe that he is really and truly present in the Eucharist? For example, is Jesus really present in the Orthodox, Anglican, or Lutheran Eucharist?

It seems unfair that He wouldn’t be just because they disagree on small things like the duration of his presence.

No, the Eucharist is not present in other Christian “Churches” (which BTW arent churches because they have no moral authority, and have no Apostolic succession, and no valid sacraments) because ***Jesus Christ is present only in the Catholic Church ***because that is the only church founded, led, and protected by him. All protestant denominations, if they even have some form of the Eucharist (many dont, and many do, but dismiss it as a “reenactment”), are worshiping a peace of bread, as it is not the body of Christ.

Also, who are you to judge, in maters of faith, what is fair and what its not. What God says is fair is fair, and that is that, because God is fairness, as he is the very essence of what is good. Christ is only present in the Catholic Church, and because Christ is the Son of God (a member of the Holy Trinity, and thus is God), that is what is fair. Not to mention that not believing in the validness of sacriments is no small mater.

**Keep in mind, however, that the Orthodox Churches are in communin with the Catholic church because they never left the Catholic church. It is a very common misconception that the Orthodox are seperated from us. In 1056, the Papel Legit and the Orthodox patriarch excomunicated EACHOTHER, not eachothers churches. Thus, they are fully apart of the Roman Catholic Church (although they dont like to admit it) and have a perfectly valid sacrament (and very beautiful music). **

Thus we can conclude the outside the Catholic church (which includes the Orthdox churches), there are no valid sacriments.** It disturbes me very much to see how willing faithfull Catholics are to list communities outside the catholic church that they consiter to have valid sacriments. If they have valid sacraments (and thus present a way to salvation outside the church), then what is the point of being catholic?!** This is a dangerous misconception that is rooted the the heresy of modernism, which Saint Pius X spoke out against. Do not buy into the garbage, instead follow the true faith Christ presents to us…

God Bless and Ave Maria!

-David-

 

[ESMDHokie77]

If you don’t have a group of validly ordained clergy, you can’t have the Real Presence! God Bless those who have received Holy Orders!

 

[manualman]

OK, let’s all step back and look at this from the larger picture.

As catholics, we believe that Christ established One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Not merely as an invisible union of believers, but as a visible structure, a real body. Why? Why did He do this? To be a light to the world! So that all would be able to know the difference that Grace makes in the lives of flawed and imperfect human beings and be drawn to the healing power of Christ.

Part of that GIFT he gave us was the sacraments: a reliable and accessible means of receiving Grace in a way both real and tangible to our human senses. The purpose of that gift was not to encase God in a particular method. The purpose is to make the gift appealing to us humans in the pitiable state we are in (sin).

Everything my fellow catholics here have said about apostolic succession, holy orders, valid consecrations, etc is true from the “method” point of view. But God transcends the gift of Church He has given us. Where we sinful humans have tarnished the name of Christ by our actions, God is not limited by our failures. God calls to people everywhere and at every time and culture. The gospel and the Church are gifts intended to amplify that call, not to constrain God.

Humanity is like a cluster of shipwreck victims floating in the sea of sin. Christ came to be our rescuer and has provided the Church and the Sacraments as the rescue ship. But some victims still in the water don’t recognize her as a rescue ship. Indeed, some mistake her for pirates! Those who through mistaken, but honest intentions reject the Church and Sacraments aren’t necessarily rejected in turn by Christ. Remember, the Church is a MEANS to an end, not the end itself. Christ may toss such people rescue rings which we are not aware of. But that shouldn’t stop those of us who understand what a gift the Sacraments and the Church really are from appreciating them and telling others about them.

As for those who have attempted to create ‘do it yourself churches’, my experience is that it is better to just share the joy we have where we are at rather than telling them that they are merely play-acting at the real thing. Who knows? God, in His mercy, might truly give them an experience of Grace in their communion service. But that doesn’t incline ME to jump off this nice, dry rescue ship back into the cold water…

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Christ can be possibly spiritually present in the Eucharist of some other christian denominations.

Christ IS NOT body, blood, soul, and divinity SUBSTANTIALLY present in the eucharists of those christian denominations.

 

[Myqyl]

Lutherans are all over the board on this issue. Some believe that He is present, others believe he is present in a spiritual way and still others believe, as do most other protestant groups that communion is merely an act that commemorates the Last Supper and nothing more. A communally shared meal. The Lutheran sect is far from monolithic and has deep divisions withing it. Very deep indeed.

I’ve heard Catholics say the same… That our Eucharist is just symbolic. Or that He is just Spiritually present. That these Catholics are so poorly instructed does not change the fact that Jesus is the Eucharist and the Eucharist is Jesus.

As for the Lutherans, they are “taught” that their Eucharist is the Body Blood Soul and Divinity of our Lord. Since the truth of that has no impact on me, I’ll wait till I meet Jesus and ask Him about it… Then I’ll know.

God bless