Lutheran communion is supposted to be the "real presence"

  • Thread starter Thread starter evangelical
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

evangelical

Guest
Lutheran communion is supposted to be the real presence.
And they have been taught to believe it.

Do you think they have the same holy spirit?
Do they have the same gifts of the holy spirit that saint Paul speaks of?

Colossian 2:8
 
Yes, but they do not believe in transubstantiation (the bread and wine becoming the Body and Blood at the consecration by the prayers of the priest). Lutherans believe in consubstantiation; that the bread and wine mysteriously become the Body and Blood at some point during their Mass, but that it ceases to be so after their mass is over.
 
evangelical said:
Do you think they have the same holy spirit?

Do they have the same gifts of the holy spirit that saint Paul speaks of?
Click to expand...
It’s a bit odd to speak in terms of “do they have” the Holy Spirit. We don’t “have” God, that is, we don’t possess Him or control Him or contain Him. Rather, we “worship” God, and the question is, are we worshiping God in the way which He intended for us to do?

So if we change the question to “Do Lutherans worship the same Holy Spirit” the answer is yes.
If we change the question to “Are Lutherans worshiping the God in the way that God intended”, the answer is no.

And the answer to your last question: “Do Lutherans have the same gifts of the Holy Spirit that saint Paul speaks of” is also pretty much no, if we’re talking about the extraordinary graces that were given during the early stages of the Church’s history. There are still other gifts of the Holy Spirit, such as certain virtues, which are certainly received by Lutherans, though they are missing out on the true religion that God founded.
 
Last edited:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...l-conflitto-alla-comunione_en.html#Eucharist_

This is the current shared Catholic-Lutheran opinion, points 140-161 cover the Eucharist.

In simple terms, Lutherans are not supposed to save up consecrated wine and wafers afterwards. It is supposed to be consumed at mass, no more consecrated than can be used then and there, just because it stays holy. There are exceptions, like distribution of communion to the housebound, but that is the basic idea.
 
Last edited:
evangelical said:
Lutheran communion is supposted to be the real presence.
And they have been taught to believe it.

Do you think they have the same holy spirit?
Do they have the same gifts of the holy spirit that saint Paul speaks of?

Colossian 2:8
Click to expand...
What I have cone to understand is that Lutherans do not hold the same belief with Catholics that the real presence of Christ continues in the species of bread and wine after the time and place of the celebration of the Eucharist.
 
My opinion is no, they don’t. If they did, they’d be Catholic.
 
There are many reasons for us Lutherans not to be Catholic.
The Eucharist really isn’t one of them.
 
(Remember, I’m not a Native English speaker so I apologize in advance for mangling exact theological terms, dragging them through impronto translation)

Jesus said This is my blood, this is my body. Take this and eat in memory of me.

The key to me is the verb. It IS his blood and body, real and present. It is shared, together, in solemn memory and acceptance.
The physical wafers and wine, once consecrated, stay holy and should be treated as such. Which in turn is why I’m uncomfortable with the concept of having pre-consecrated items lying around outside the actual mass/eucharistic celebration. At my weekday mass the priest looks like he does a quick headcount and only put out/pour enough for the assembled congregation.

I tend to see the discussions of transsubstantiation, and at what word the change occur etc etc as quibbles to keep various factions of theologicans busy. The Eucharist is a solemn mystery, at once simple and complicated. I’m content to experience God’s presence, I don’t need the exact blueprint.

Close enough?
 
My understanding of ‘consubstantiation’ is that the substance of the bread remains when the substance of the Body of Christ becomes present in the bread. The bread is with the Body of Christ.

Transubstantiation teaches that the substance of the bread does not remain. That the bread is no longer bread but is the Body of Christ.
 
Last edited:
SnowRose said:
There are many reasons for us Lutherans not to be Catholic.
The Eucharist really isn’t one of them.
Click to expand...
Of course, there are. But to hear more than one Lutheran tell it, Lutherans are “more Catholic than Catholics.” One Lutheran in particular stated Lutherans are the real Catholics. He never did elaborate on his meaning. But is that a view shared by all Lutherans? Or was it just his personal opinion?
 
The Lutheran equivalent of your Church militant types seems to view the Catholic church as full of superficial pointless practices. Personally I don’t care, if the things you do and we don’t do are important to you, that’s fine. 500 years later I’m not making an issue of it. We just worship differently.

But it is true than the Lutheran churches consider themselves apostolic and catholic (lower case C). They and the RC just disagree about what that means in practice.

Edit: I just summarised 500 years of fireband polemics on both sides as ”just disagree about”. That may have been the understatement of the day!
 
Last edited:
The Scandinavian Lutheran churches have apostolic succession. Nice try.
 
Of course we do.
The ordination of women springs from a difference in the understanding of the ministry of all believers. And that understanding had consequences on the view of the sacraments and so on from the beginning of the reformation. It is one of the basic differences between the RC/Lutheran churches, although the various Lutheran churches don’t quite agree on the implications.

However, I’m not trying to convince you. You are not allowed to commune with us anyway, even if you’d be welcome. Besides, we were discussing how real life Lutherans understand the Eucharist Real Presence, not the ministry which we do disagree about.

For the sake of argument, imagine a male Scandi Lutheran priest ordained by a male bishop who was ordained by a male and so on. Would that fullfill your technical requirement?
 
The Catholic Church does not believe that Lutherans have apostolic succession. While we agree on many things we do not believe this.
 
I cannot say that Lutherans do not have the gifts of the Holy Spirit of which St. Paul speaks. The holy Spirit is not bound by our theological differences, as has been shown within the Charismatic Movement; and I would not be the least bit surprised to find that Lutherans hve received such gifts, along with other Charismatic Christians who have exhibited them.

Do all Lutherans receive such gifts? Do all Catholics? The answer appears to be “no”. But all not receiving the gifts does not mean none do.
 
Brittany said:
Sure, they have the same Holy Spirit. There is only one Holy Spirit. But they don’t have the same communion. Even if they believe in the Real Presence, they don’t have priests with valid holy orders/apostolic succession to consecrate the Eucharist, so their communion doesn’t contain Jesus in the same sense that the Communion of Orthodox and Catholic Churches do.

(If I am wrong, somebody please correct me.)
Click to expand...
I read that by the elimination of all sacramental language in creation of bishops, the Lutheran bishops of Norway and Sweden have invalid Holy Orders just as with the Anglican. There is no intention to do what the Catholic church does – the sacrament of Holy Orders.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top