Lutheran belief - Sacramental Union (not Consubstantiation)

[benjohnson]

The problem is that you have an incredibly idiosyncratic view of philosophy, yet you employ philosophy (unconsciously) every time you argue a case.

If you’re equating philosophy as any form of reason and wisdom, then you’re correct.

Perhaps I should be using the term metaphysics.

 

[KjetilK]

If you’re equating philosophy as any form of reason and wisdom, then you’re correct.

Perhaps I should be using the term metaphysics.

Metaphysics is also philosophy. Philosophy is nothing more than what Wikipedia describes as “the study of general and fundamental problems, such as those connected with reality, existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language.” Philosophy as such is a neutral term, and when the FC states that there are, in the consecrated bread, two substances – the bread itself and the body of Christ – and, in the consecrated wine, two substances – the wine itself and the blood of Christ – it is making a philosophical statement concerning reality and existence. Philosophy is not, in and of itself, demoted to ‘human traditions.’

 

[KathleenGee]

Read a source some time ago that metaphysics is the study of reality.

 

[benjohnson]

Read a source some time ago that metaphysics is the study of reality.

It is… but it’s typically involves the sort of mental gymnastics that I’m not quite happy with, and don’t think are necessary for God’s salvation.

Frankly, if God’s salvation is based on what I know and understand, then I’m doomed.

 

[KjetilK]

It is… but it’s typically involves the sort of mental gymnastics that I’m not quite happy with, and don’t think are necessary for God’s salvation.

Frankly, if God’s salvation is based on what I know and understand, then I’m doomed.

Do you even know what philosophy is? Can you give a definition?

 

[benjohnson]

Do you even know what philosophy is? Can you give a definition?

Father, I find your question petulant. Please refrain from communicating with me further about this subject.

I will take a time out to review Luther’s small catechism in regards to the 8th commandment and I suggest you do so as well.

 

[KjetilK]

Father, I find your question petulant. Please refrain from communicating with me further about this subject.

Couldn’t you just answer the question. Until now, your only ‘definition’ of philosophy is that it’s ‘man made’ and ‘worldly.’

 

[pablope]

We don’t need Aristotle’s definition, as the Gospel has revealed to us.

My contention is that you could piece together SU with scripture/revelation, and not philosophy.

And the same could not be said of Transub? Are then saying SU is vastly superior to Transsub…yet transsub was a response to heresy or issue within the Church…

 

[pablope]

Thanks… I thought you went to a site specifically containing the archives of Trent.

In my opinion. SU is basically a restatement of what is revealed to us.

And Transsub is not?

Okay…so what is your standard of determining what is “too much”?

And what is your standard for when to determine when the “mystery” is enough and when it is not enough?

When you have to bind yourself to a philosophical statement that isn’t a revealed from God to be considered a non-heretical Christian.

Okay…what is your standard for determining when a philosophical statement is revealed from God? Is SU one such statement as revealed from God?

Even with that said, I don’t think Transubstantiation, if understood to be a bulwark against heresy, should be church deciding.

When the C Church came up with Transsub as a bulwark against heresy…do you think the Church was not guided by the HS is coming up with a response against heresy?

Do you think transsub was just picked up in the air?

 

[benjohnson]

Thanks… I thought you went to a site specifically containing the archives of Trent.

There are several, but you deserved a Catholic answer

Okay…what is your standard for determining when a philosophical statement is revealed from God? Is SU one such statement as revealed from God?

When it’s in scripture, or a reflection of scripture.

Frankly, our Orthodox friends would have better answers for this particular objection - they’ve been mulling it over for much longer and seem particularly wise in these sorts of thoughts.

When the C Church came up with Transsub as a bulwark against heresy…do you think the Church was not guided by the HS is coming up with a response against heresy?

Do you think transsub was just picked up in the air?

I can’t really answer that question - certainly I could say that the church was guided by the HS in combating this particular heresy.

For the second question - of course not. For the definition, the council of Trent was filled with many wise and God-loving men, and there is much of the Holy Sprit in the documents that were produced.

 

[KathleenGee]

Am I seeing some of the same sentiments here akin to the Orthodox?..that SU is more acceptable TRANS…because the Latin Church says so? Isn’t that authority issues?

I read a number of times divisions in the churches go down to the bottom line of authority.

Going back to ancient times, final authority was recognized in Rome to be the place to settled disputes from the other churches.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Agree that Lutherans have considerable agreement with Orthodox on sacramental theology.

“The Mystery of the Church: The Holy Eucharist in the Life of the Church.”

Orthodox and Lutherans recognize the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist as the “fulfillment of the Christians’ participation in the life of Christ and his church through eating his body and drinking his blood in the Holy Eucharist” (Duràu Statement §11). They also affirm that the Eucharist and the believers’ participation in it remain a mystery that transcends human understanding. The Holy Eucharist is the Sacrament of the New Covenant instituted by Christ himself (Mt 26, 27f; par.). As such it is an indispensable part of the life of the Church, which is the body of Christ. Through Baptism the believer is born again and sealed with the Holy Spirit (for Orthodox, the seal is given through Chrismation). In the Eucharist, the believers receive the body and blood of the Lord as a healing and spiritual nourishment of their souls and bodies and experience their membership in the Body of Christ. In this way, believers receive forgiveness of their sins and the gift of eternal life. The Eucharist presupposes the confession of the one faith of the church and strengthens the believers’ union with Christ and their union and communion with each other both locally and universally (Mk 14,22-26; 1Cor 10,16f).

d. Orthodox and Lutherans agree that the Eucharist is also a gift of communion granted to us by Christ. In this communion we are fully united with Him and with the members of His Body. The “how”of the mystery remains inexplicable, but the “what” is clearly confessed in faith and thanksgiving. As John of Damascus says, “… if you enquire how this happens, it is enough for you to learn that it was through the Holy Spirit, just as the Lord took on Himself flesh that subsisted in Him and was born of the holy Mother of God through the Spirit” (Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, 4, 13).

1. Lutheran and Orthodox traditions each stress proper preparation for participation in the Eucharist. For both this involves preparatory prayers and Confession and forgiveness of sins, which for Orthodox is the sacrament of penance. For Orthodox, preparation also includes fasting; for Lutherans fasting is not required but often practiced. Both agree that the Eucharist must be administered properly/canonically and only by ordained ministers.

1. Lutherans and Orthodox take the Lord’s words “this is my body; this is my blood” (Mt 26,27f, par.) literally. They believe that in the Eucharist the bread and wine become Christ’s body and blood to be consumed by the communicants. How this happens is regarded by both as a profound and real mystery. In order to approach that mystery, Orthodox and Lutherans have drawn on their respective theological traditions and developed different insights on what takes place.

a. Lutherans speak about Christ’s “real presence” in the Eucharist and describe Christ’s body and blood as being “in, with and under” the bread and wine (Formula of Concord, SD 7). By this they mean that the bread and the wine really become the body and blood of Christ, through the Words of Institution and the action of the Holy Spirit. Drawing on patristic sources, Lutherans understand Christ’s presence in the elements christologically: “Just as in Christ two distinct, unaltered natures are inseparably united, so in the Holy Supper two essences, the natural bread and the true natural body of Christ, are present together here on earth in the action of the sacrament, as it was instituted” (SD 7). Lutherans, however, maintain a distinction between a personal, hypostatic union and a “sacramental union”, favoring the latter in order to describe Christ’s presence in the Eucharist. Lutheran theology is able to speak of a transformation (mutatio) of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ (Apology X, 2; XXIV). This is not understood as eliminating the physical character of the bread and wine in the Eucharist. Lutherans emphasize that it is God’s Word which makes the sacrament (Large Catechism, 5: The Sacrament of the Altar).

c. Orthodox and Lutherans agree, whether they use the language of “metabole” or of “real presence”, that the bread and wine do not lose their essence (physis) when becoming sacramentally Christ’s body and blood. The medieval doctrine of transsubstantiation is rejected by both Orthodox and Lutherans.

1. Orthodox and Lutherans believe that the changes that take place in the Eucharist are accomplished by the Holy Spirit. In the liturgical celebration of the Eucharist, the Orthodox explicitly include the entire economy of salvation, which culminates in the Words of Institution, Anamnesis, Epiclesis and Holy Communion. For Lutherans, the totality of the work of Christ is also presupposed and is liturgically enacted in the eucharistic worship service as a whole, although less elaborately. Both Lutherans and Orthodox believe that the Eucharist cannot be isolated from the entire mystery of salvation.

1. Lutherans and Orthodox agree that the relation of the Eucharist to the ordained ministry/priesthood (hierosyne) requires full discussion at a later stage. Lutherans and Orthodox both hope and pray for a day when they may celebrate the Eucharist together and work together as the one Body of Christ for the life and the salvation of the world.
   ecupatria.org/DIALOGUES/L…islava2006.htm
   orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/uppsala.aspx

 

[benjohnson]

Am I seeing some of the same sentiments here akin to the Orthodox?

I would say so - when Orthodox people speak about it, we Lutherans seem to usually be nodding our head in agreement.

 

[benjohnson]

Am I seeing some of the same sentiments here akin to the Orthodox?

From out viewpoint, would say so - when Orthodox people speak about it, we Lutherans seem to usually be nodding our head in agreement.

 

[pablope]

There are several, but you deserved a Catholic answer

Okay…what is your standard for determining when a philosophical statement is revealed from God? Is SU one such statement as revealed from God?

I can’t really answer that question - certainly I could say that the church was guided by the HS in combating this particular heresy.

Good…and I agree, the HS guides the church in responding to heresies…and as borned by Tradition prior in combating heresies, the Church response has been guided by the HS.

So if the HS did indeed guide the church in combating the heresy…then it would/follow tht the response also was guided by the HS…that is why the Church came up with Transsub.

So would you say then the Transsub was guided by the HS in response to a heresy…and is therefore from God or the HS?

Do you think transsub was just picked up in the air?

For the second question - of course not. For the definition, the council of Trent was filled with many wise and God-loving men, and there is much of the Holy Sprit in the documents that were produced.

Good…i am glad you said this. So then, if the HS guided the documents at Trent, what is your continuing objection to Transsub or to the use of metaphysical constructs in responding to heresies?

[/QUOTE]

 

[KathleenGee]

To the Lutherans here…come a little bit closer…why not join the Orthodox?

That would resolve alot of the problem. We recognize the hierarchy and sacraments of the Orthodox.

Then you would have to deal with the most complex issues of the Orthodox and Latin Churches and their histories.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

To the Lutherans here…come a little bit closer…why not join the Orthodox?

That would resolve alot of the problem. We recognize the hierarchy and sacraments of the Orthodox.

Then you would have to deal with the most complex issues of the Orthodox and Latin Churches and their histories.

Lutherans are part of the Western Church. Though we have much in common with Orthodox Christians, Rome is our home.

Face it, Lutherans are Catholic cousins whether one wants to admit it or not

Lutherans and Catholics will reconcile well before the Eastern and Western Church unites, I am sad to predict.

 

[KjetilK]

From out viewpoint, would say so - when Orthodox people speak about it, we Lutherans seem to usually be nodding our head in agreement.

Yet many Orthodox have absolutely no problem saying that there is a μετουσίωσις (metousíōsis), which involves a ‘change of substance’ (thus implying a philosophical thinking that embraces the category of ‘substance’). And translated to Latin, μετουσίωσις would be transsubstantiatio.

They also heartily embraces the Nicene-Constantinopolitan and Chalcedonian Creeds.

It is simply a myth that the Orthodox don’t embrace philosophy, and use it extensively in their theology.

 

[JonNC]

No, because SU states that in the consecrated sacrament, the bread and wine are “present together” with the body and blood of Christ, while transubstantiation holds that the bread and wine are transformed, leaving only their appearances or accidents.

But Confessio Augustana article 10 doesn’t teach the FC definition of the real presence (although it can be compatible). Confessio Augustana, being an ecumenical document, is not bound either way. In the 21st article, it is said that “there is nothing [in the first part of the confession] that varies from the Scriptures, or from the Church Catholic, or from the Church of Rome as known from its writers.” Since ‘the Church of Rome’ taught transubstantiation at the time of the Reformation, and had done so (on the level of terminology) for at least 300 years, article 10 must at least be compatible with transubstantiation. In FC we see a narrowing of the definition in Confessio Augustana.

What is your take, then, on the linked document, understanding that this is not officially accepted by either Lutherans or Catholics, but instead a dialogue statement.

Catholic and Lutheran Christians together confess the real and true presence of the Lord in the Eucharist. There are differences, however, in theological statements on the mode and therefore duration of the real presence.

In order to confess the reality of the eucharistic presence without reserve the Catholic Church teaches that "Christ whole and entire"34 becomes present through the transformation of the whole substance of the bread and the wine into the substance of the body and blood of Christ while the empirically accessible appearances of bread and wine (accidentia) continue to exist unchanged. This “wonderful and singular change” is “most aptly” called transsubstantiation by the Catholic Church.35 This terminology has widely been considered by Lutherans as an attempt rationalistically to explain the mystery of Christ’s presence in the sacrament; further, many suppose also that in this approach the present Lord is not seen as a person and naturalistic misunderstandings become easy.

The Lutherans have given expression to the reality of the Eucharistic presence by speaking of presence of Christ’s body and blood in, with and under bread and wine�but not of transsubstantiation. Here they see real analogy to the Lord’s incarnation: as God and man become one in Jesus Christ, Christ’s body and blood, on the one hand, and the bread and wine, on the other, give rise to a sacramental unity. Catholics, in turn, find that this does not do sufficient justice to this very unity and to the force of Christ’s word “This is my body”.

The ecumenical discussion has shown that these two positions must no longer be regarded as opposed in a way that leads to separation. The Lutheran tradition agrees with the Catholic tradition that the consecrated elements do not simply remain bread and wine but by the power of the creative Word are bestowed as the body and blood of Christ. In this sense it also could occasionally speak, as does the Greek tradition of a “change”.36 The concept of transsubstantiation for its part is intended as a confession and preservation of the mystery character of the Eucharistic presence; it is not intended as an explanation of how this change occurs37 (see the appendices on “Real Presence” and “Christ’s Presence in the Eucharist”).

prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/l-rc/doc/e_l-rc_eucharist.html

These theologians seem to agree that the two concepts should not be Church dividing.

The concept of transsubstantiation for its part is intended as a confession and preservation of the mystery character of the Eucharistic presence; it is not intended as an explanation of how this change occurs

And personally, when Transubstantiation is described in this way, I tend to agree with the dialogue conclusion.

Jon

 

[GKC]

What is your take, then, on the linked document, understanding that this is not officially accepted by either Lutherans or Catholics, but instead a dialogue statement.

prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/l-rc/doc/e_l-rc_eucharist.html

These theologians seem to agree that the two concepts should not be Church dividing.

And personally, when Transubstantiation is described in this way, I tend to agree with the dialogue conclusion.

Jon

Not meaning to intrude, but that last quoted statement of the dialogue is why I have never had a problem with transub.

Now fading back into the shadows.

GKC