Just Curious I Cor. 11

[Hiskid1973]

27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

I am curious. I see this verse used to justify transubstantiation by some. In reading the context around it their were factions and wrong attitudes…Looks like they had a party attitude when they gathered then for the communion elements…They were told then to make sure their heart was pure before they partook… I am just wondering how that was brought to mean transubstantiation specifically in drinking the cup unworthily…Thanks …God Bless …K

 

[Nine_Two]

I’ll argue against it meaning transubstantiation, but I’d say it indicates the real presence.

If it is done simply in rememberance, what could one be guilty of? Not remembering during rememberance? What need is there to be worthy? But if it actually is the body and blood of christ, then unworthly partaking of it amounts to sacrilage.

 

[GEddie]

I’ll argue against it meaning transubstantiation, but I’d say it indicates the real presence.

If it is done simply in rememberance, what could one be guilty of? Not remembering during rememberance? What need is there to be worthy? But if it actually is the body and blood of christ, then unworthly partaking of it amounts to sacrilage.

Pardon my stupid question: isn’t “real presence” the modern term for transubstantiation???

ICXC NIKA.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

I am curious. I see this verse used to justify transubstantiation by some. In reading the context around it their were factions and wrong attitudes…Looks like they had a party attitude when they gathered then for the communion elements…They were told then to make sure their heart was pure before they partook… I am just wondering how that was brought to mean transubstantiation specifically in drinking the cup unworthily…Thanks …God Bless …K

Verse 27 seems to imply that the body and blood of the Lord is present. Otherwise, how could you be guilty of something when you are not in the vincinity of it.

The Lord may very well have unlimited will over His body and blood, and while we believe His spirit is everywhere all the time, we have no reason to believe that His body and blood are everywhere all the time.

 

[StrawberryJam]

I’ll argue against it meaning transubstantiation, but I’d say it indicates the real presence.

If it is done simply in rememberance, what could one be guilty of? Not remembering during rememberance? What need is there to be worthy? But if it actually is the body and blood of christ, then unworthly partaking of it amounts to sacrilage.

Have the Orthodox gotten rid of confession to a priest before partaking? I was told they still do this, maybe I got bad information.

 

[Nine_Two]

Have the Orthodox gotten rid of confession to a priest before partaking? I was told they still do this, maybe I got bad information.

One must confess in the presence of a priest. (not to), but not necessarily before each time. The practice of confessing before having communion arose due to the long periods people would go without communion. Unless you miss communion for three consecutive weeks, you don’t need to reconfess, although regular confession is still required.

 

[StrawberryJam]

One must confess in the presence of a priest. (not to), but not necessarily before each time. The practice of confessing before having communion arose due to the long periods people would go without communion. Unless you miss communion for three consecutive weeks, you don’t need to reconfess, although regular confession is still required.

I think I need to ask more questions about this in a seperate thread Nine Two.

Thank you for the answer. It only raises more questions.

 

[Nine_Two]

Pardon my stupid question: isn’t “real presence” the modern term for transubstantiation???

ICXC NIKA.

No. Transubstantiation is a definition of how it happens, real presence just says what it is.