Methodism and Catholicism

[rfournier103]

I don’t believe in “once saved always saved”, so that doesn’t interfere with my hesitance towards the idea of mortal and venial sin. I just have a hard time grasping how sin has so much of an impact when Christ has already died for us.

Christ died so that we COULD be saved; but it is up to US to make the personal decision to take advantage of this or not.

There IS a difference between REDEMPTION and SALVATION. The whole human race was redeemed with Christ’s Death and Resurection. Does that mean we’re all saved? No. For SALVATION we must follow Jesus, and His Holy Example.

 

[QNDNNDQDCE]

Methodist beliefs about the Eucharist are all over the place–they include transubstantiation and mere memorial meal, and everything in between. As for John Wesley’s view, it is not the same as what you saw on the UMC webpage. John Wesley, thougn he did not believe in transubsantiation, clearly believed that the believer receives the body and blood of Christ in the consecrated elements.

The way you have stated Wesley’s views sound like something Calvin would have said. Can you please show us some quotes to help get a better idea of what Wesley thought?

 

[RyanBlack]

The way you have stated Wesley’s views sound like something Calvin would have said. Can you please show us some quotes to help get a better idea of what Wesley thought?

From a eucharistic hymn:

“Who can say how bread and wine
God into man conveys?
How the bread His flesh imparts,
How the wine transmits His blood,
Fills His faithful people’s hearts
With all the life of God!”

 

[QNDNNDQDCE]

That still sounds Calvinistic to me. Notice the focus on reception rather than presence. Calvinists believe that the body of Christ is stuck in heaven so it cannot be present in the sacrament except in a “spiritual” (in this case, basically meaning metaphorical) manner. I will show you what I mean. Here’s a quote from the Westminster Larger Catechism.

Q. 168. What is the Lord’s Supper?
A. The Lord’s Supper is a sacrament of the new testament, wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine according to the appointment of Jesus Christ, his death is showed forth; and they that worthily communicate feed upon his body and blood, to their spiritual nourishment and growth in grace; have their union and communion with him confirmed; testify and renew their thankfulness, and engagement to God, and their mutual love and fellowship each with other, as members of the same mystical body.

Taken at face value, we might accept this as an affirmation of the real presence, but it’s really not. Here are a few quotes from the Westminster Confession of Faith.

The outward elements in this sacrament, duly set apart to the uses ordained by Christ, have such relation to him crucified, as that, truly, yet sacramentally only, they are sometimes called by the name of the things they represent, to wit, the body and blood of Christ; albeit, in substance and nature, they still remain truly and only bread and wine, as they were before. (29.5)

The words “truly and only” exclude the Catholic doctrine of real presence.

That doctrine which maintains a change of the substance of bread and wine, into the substance of Christ’s body and blood (commonly called transubstantiation) by consecration of a priest, or by any other way, is repugnant, not to Scripture alone, but even to common sense, and reason; overthroweth the nature of the sacrament, and hath been, and is, the cause of manifold superstitions; yea, of gross idolatries. (29.6)

You may recognize this exact language in Wesley’s own Confession posted earlier in the thread.

Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements, in this sacrament, do then also, inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually, receive, and feed upon, Christ crucified, and all benefits of his death: the body and blood of Christ being then, not corporally or carnally, in, with, or under the bread and wine; yet, as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses. (29.7)

Although the sacrament does not actually contain the body and blood of Christ, those who partake of the sacrament truly receive Christ’s body an blood, but spiritually and by faith.

Although ignorant and wicked men receive the outward elements in this sacrament; yet, they receive not the thing signified thereby; but, by their unworthy coming thereunto, are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, to their own damnation. Wherefore, all ignorant and ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy communion with him, so are they unworthy of the Lord’s table; and cannot, without great sin against Christ, while they remain such, partake of these holy mysteries, or be admitted thereunto. (29.8)

The reception of the sacrament is dependent on the faith of the receiver. Those who receive unworthily do not receive the thin signified, i.e. they do not receive the body and blood of Christ.

None of these articles (to say nothing of the others) are compatible with Catholic doctrine. Is Wesley’s belief in the real presence an affirmation of this Calvinistic teaching or something more than that?

 

[Porknpie]

archives.umc.org/interior.asp?mid=1732

The statement on abortion from the UMC is essentially prochoice. This would be the biggest difference between the UMC and the Catholic Church, or between the UMC and what John Wesley believed. Wesley also regarded birth control itself as immoral.

From the link above:

Our belief in the sanctity of unborn human life makes us reluctant to approve abortion.

double talk. then you do not believe in the sanctity of human life

But we are equally bound to respect the sacredness of the life and well-being of the mother, for whom devastating damage may result from an unacceptable pregnancy.

I can’t think of anything more devastating then the killing of an innocent human life that never had a chance to be born and live a life of 80 or 90 years with a wife, children and grandchildren.

In continuity with past Christian teaching,

what past teaching? Not Christ, not the apostles, not the reformers… What past teaching?

we recognize tragic conflicts of life with life that may justify abortion, and in such cases we support the legal option of abortion under proper medical procedures.

how sad

PnP

 

[RyanBlack]

None of these articles (to say nothing of the others) are compatible with Catholic doctrine. Is Wesley’s belief in the real presence an affirmation of this Calvinistic teaching or something more than that?

I never said Wesley’s eucharistic theology was the same as Catholic teaching. I maintained, and continue to maintain, that Wesley believed in the real presence of Christ in the consecrated elements. My basis for this claim is what I learned during the course of earning two graduate degrees in theology at Duke Divinity School (a United Methodist school of theology)–specifically in a course in liturgy, and a course in sacramental theology, which were taken with professors among the leading liturgical scholars in the United States, and who are very knowledgeable in the works of John Wesley.

 

[RyanBlack]

Here’s another Wesleyan eucharistic hymn, which shows a belief in the real presence.

In the rite Thou hast enjoin’d
Let us now our Saviour find,
Drink Thy blood for sinners shed
Taste Thee in the broken bread.

 

[MethodistEsq]

Since beginning to attend this Methodist church, I no longer have the desire to convert and have many doubts about Catholic theology, but I just don’t know what to believe anymore! Is everyone meant to be Catholic Christians?

There are lots of people here who can adress any concerns you might have with the doctrines of the Roman church. I would be ill-equipped to do so. What I can do is express gratitude that Methodism manages to speak to you. Welcome to our family—I hope that Methodism leads you closer to Christ.

To address your question, I am comfortable saying that United Methodists believe in “the holy catholic church”, which is to say the universal church. The UMC expresses this view in the version of the Apostles’ Creed promulgated in the current version of the UMC hymnal and found here for reference. Consequently, United Methodists are lower case-C catholic Christians, at least as I understand it.

Whether every single Christian is meant to be a member of the Roman Catholic Church, I can’t say. Naturally, the Roman church will have a view on it, probably in the affirmative although I don’t want to answer for them. It’s an entirely different question to me, and one I’m afraid to say is quite above my pay grade. I’m only a layman in the UMC and not equipped with the position or education to address the matter.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Abide,

Based on what you know in the 43 pages, is their description accurate below… does the word “Symbolizes” reflect their belief?

The Lord’s Supper is a holy meal of bread and wine that symbolizes the body and blood of Christ.

Back to the purpose of the thread, Komeeks has to discern the Truth, what was it that Christ taught the apostles and what did the apostles teach their descendants on the subject of not only the Eucharist but also on faith and morals, the Priesthood and more. And where does she go to seek this Truth? The Church, One Holy Catholic and Apostolic has never been confused on his words on the Eucharist. The Body of Christ has been torn by men teaching false beliefs and pulling people away from the Church Christ established. The Evil One especially wants to spread the belief that the meal is a “memorial meal”, symbolic only and that Christ did not established a Church, singular, with seven sacraments by which he gives us grace for our salvation.

PnP

Yes, about “symbolizes”–from the document that reflects a part of UMC belief; but, very importantly, I think people here are totally misunderstanding what they mean by a symbol. Sorry, I’m really tired and I have eye-strain from a long work week, but I need to quote some things to explain what I mean, but I’m dog-tired for tonight. (I’d use the yawning emoticon, but what I really need is a “feel like road kill” picture.)

They do believe Communion is much more than memorial—Christ is truly present, and actual graces are received—as well as memorial by Christ’s very words.

 

[AbideWithMe]

There are lots of people here who can adress any concerns you might have with the doctrines of the Roman church. I would be ill-equipped to do so. What I can do is express gratitude that Methodism manages to speak to you. Welcome to our family—I hope that Methodism leads you closer to Christ.

To address your question, I am comfortable saying that United Methodists believe in “the holy catholic church”, which is to say the universal church. The UMC expresses this view in the version of the Apostles’ Creed promulgated in the current version of the UMC hymnal and found here for reference. Consequently, United Methodists are lower case-C catholic Christians, at least as I understand it.

Whether every single Christian is meant to be a member of the Roman Catholic Church, I can’t say. Naturally, the Roman church will have a view on it, probably in the affirmative although I don’t want to answer for them. It’s an entirely different question to me, and one I’m afraid to say is quite above my pay grade. I’m only a layman in the UMC and not equipped with the position or education to address the matter.

Ah, I thought I saw a new Methodist poster here. Welcome.

 

[AbideWithMe]

I never said Wesley’s eucharistic theology was the same as Catholic teaching. I maintained, and continue to maintain, that Wesley believed in the real presence of Christ in the consecrated elements. My basis for this claim is what I learned during the course of earning two graduate degrees in theology at Duke Divinity School (a United Methodist school of theology)–specifically in a course in liturgy, and a course in sacramental theology, which were taken with professors among the leading liturgical scholars in the United States, and who are very knowledgeable in the works of John Wesley.

Here’s another Wesleyan eucharistic hymn, which shows a belief in the real presence.

In the rite Thou hast enjoin’d
Let us now our Saviour find,
Drink Thy blood for sinners shed
Taste Thee in the broken bread.

This is what I read, too, in their official document on Communion. I don’t see Calvinism; I see a belief in a mystery, unexplained but accepted by faith.

 

[ChrisB103]

I don’t believe in “once saved always saved”, so that doesn’t interfere with my hesitance towards the idea of mortal and venial sin. I just have a hard time grasping how sin has so much of an impact when Christ has already died for us.

Komeeks, I can understand your reluctance to accept that sin has such a profound impact on our spiritual lives given Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. The Catholic understanding is that Christ redeemed the whole world by his death on the cross. This means that by his death on the cross, Jesus offers a superabundance of grace to the whole world. The difference between being redeemed and being saved is that to be saved we must accept the gift of grace, which God constantly offers us. Once we are saved, we must continue in the race. Here are a couple verses from the Bible off the top of my head that I think may be worth your consideration on the subject of sin and our supernatural lives:

1 John 5:16-17 “16 If you see your brother or sister committing what is not a mortal sin, you will ask, and God[e] will give life to such a one—to those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin that is mortal; I do not say that you should pray about that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that is not mortal.” These verses essentially repeat what the New Testament epistles say about the wages of sin being death. What kind of death do sins beget? I would suggest that it is a spiritual death; an extinguishing of the eternal life of the triune God within the sinner. Please note that for a sin to be truly mortal in nature it must fulfill three requirements. The sin must be of grave matter (a serious sin which breaks one of the Ten Commandments), the sinner must have full knowledge of the gravity of the sin and must deliberately use one’s full consent and will to choose the act. (See the Catechism CCC 1854-1861 for more details.

Romans 2:6-9 “For he will repay according to each one’s deeds: to those who by patiently doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; while for those who are self-seeking and who obey not the truth but wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be anguish and distress for everyone who does evil.” Paul makes it very clear that our actions play an indispensable role in the eternal state of our souls. His words here echo Jesus’s words in Mt 16:27.

Hopefully this helps clear up the issue of mortal sin a bit for you!

 

[ChrisB103]

And if you haven’t already read it, Catholic Answers’ article on papal infallibility is a useful start to understanding the Catholic doctrine, its history and its basis. What specifically is holding you back from belief in papal infallibility if I may ask?

 

[robwar]

There are lots of people here who can adress any concerns you might have with the doctrines of the Roman church. I would be ill-equipped to do so. What I can do is express gratitude that Methodism manages to speak to you. Welcome to our family—I hope that Methodism leads you closer to Christ.

To address your question, I am comfortable saying that United Methodists believe in “the holy catholic church”, which is to say the universal church. The UMC expresses this view in the version of the Apostles’ Creed promulgated in the current version of the UMC hymnal and found here for reference. Consequently, United Methodists are lower case-C catholic Christians, at least as I understand it.

Whether every single Christian is meant to be a member of the Roman Catholic Church, I can’t say. Naturally, the Roman church will have a view on it, probably in the affirmative although I don’t want to answer for them. It’s an entirely different question to me, and one I’m afraid to say is quite above my pay grade. I’m only a layman in the UMC and not equipped with the position or education to address the matter.

Welcome, It is always nice to see Methodists on CAF. (I am a former UMC). Yes, UMC would see themselves as loser case c “catholic Christians”. At least that is what I remember how it was explained growing up UMC and why as part of the liturgy (I grew up is a high liturgy church) we said the apostles creed every Sunday. I always found it odd that we would say at the end of it “Holy Catholic church” and I thought we aren’t Catholic. In confirmation, it was said that catholic meant universal and we are universal Christians. Now being Roman Catholic, I think is was misuse of the original meaning but that is how the apostles creed is viewed in UMC.

 

[rfournier103]

There are lots of people here who can adress any concerns you might have with the doctrines of the Roman church. I would be ill-equipped to do so. What I can do is express gratitude that Methodism manages to speak to you. Welcome to our family—I hope that Methodism leads you closer to Christ.

To address your question, I am comfortable saying that United Methodists believe in “the holy catholic church”, which is to say the universal church. The UMC expresses this view in the version of the Apostles’ Creed promulgated in the current version of the UMC hymnal and found here for reference. Consequently, United Methodists are lower case-C catholic Christians, at least as I understand it.

Whether every single Christian is meant to be a member of the Roman Catholic Church, I can’t say. Naturally, the Roman church will have a view on it, probably in the affirmative although I don’t want to answer for them. It’s an entirely different question to me, and one I’m afraid to say is quite above my pay grade. I’m only a layman in the UMC and not equipped with the position or education to address the matter.

If you wouldn’t mind referring to our Church as the Catholic Church, or Roman Catholic Church, I think we would appreciate it. There are alot of pretty nasty anti-Catholics out there who love to call it the ‘roman church’, and say we practice ‘romanism’. It just leaves me with a bad taste; although I’m sure you don’t mean anything by it…

Anyways, welcome aboard! Until this thread I knew very little about the Methodists, and this is a learning experience for me as well.

 

[ChurchSoldier]

Umm I don’t want to sound negative, really, but when I bounced around the UMC.org site, on the front page is a series of links about “Offering Communion Online”. Link Here

And thank you to the person who mentioned John Wesley was an Anglican (until he died). Not many know this.

As has been stated, this is an interesting post in which I’ve learned a few things.

 

[komeeks18]

And if you haven’t already read it, Catholic Answers’ article on papal infallibility is a useful start to understanding the Catholic doctrine, its history and its basis. What specifically is holding you back from belief in papal infallibility if I may ask?

Actually my main issue isn’t really papal infallibility, but just the belief of the infallibility of the Church. The idea that the Catholic Church has all of the answers and truth, when I don’t believe any religion or Church has the complete truth. The Catholic Church has very strict rules for how Catholics are to live their lives and what’s defined as right and wrong. Plus, the whole Co-Redemptrix thing. There’s so many things I’ve come to doubt in the Church, because it seems to be violating Scripture.

 

[ChrisB103]

Actually my main issue isn’t really papal infallibility, but just the belief of the infallibility of the Church. The idea that the Catholic Church has all of the answers and truth, when I don’t believe any religion or Church has the complete truth. The Catholic Church has very strict rules for how Catholics are to live their lives and what’s defined as right and wrong. Plus, the whole Co-Redemptrix thing. There’s so many things I’ve come to doubt in the Church, because it seems to be violating Scripture.

Perhaps it would help to know that Catholics don’t believe that we have all of the answers. Some things are still mysteries to varying degrees. We do believe that we have the fullness of revealed truth, but God has not revealed everything to us. Even if he did, I don’t think our human minds could process it all. Except for maybe Jimmy Akin and Tim Staples.

The more I learn, the more I’m surprised to hear the range of acceptable beliefs within Catholicism. Sure, you won’t find as great of a range of beliefs as you might in some modern mainline Protestant denominations, but I’m personally thankful for that - and I don’t mean that as an insult, I know a lot of awesome Protestants who don’t fall into that category. For instance, there’s a range of acceptable beliefs on predestination, on evolution/creation, and on any number of matters of prudential judgment where we are each called to apply principles of our faith before we act.

As someone who’s grown up in the Church and put forth a relatively consistent effort to follow her teachings, I personally don’t find them to be restrictive to any sort of negative degree. She’s our Mother, and she knows what’s best for us because she is the bride of Christ. I find that following the rules leads me to deeper peace, greater depth in my relationship with God, and an overall greater satisfaction in life. I’d be more than happy to discuss specifics on where you think the Catholic Church is too strict if you’d like.

To me, there are a few keys to understanding Marian doctrines. A big one is OT/NT typology, understanding Mary as the New Eve, the Ark of the New Covenant, etc. A simpler key to understanding the Marian doctrines is to understand that she is the crowned jewel of creation, but she is still one of us. She is the perfect example of receptivity to God’s will. Think about Mary as the example of a human being that we are all called to strive for (without taking anything away from Jesus, of course). We are all called to be co-redeemers of the world - to bring Christ’s sacrifice to the world as his Body. Mary is an excellent example of this because she literally brought Jesus into the world so that he would save us from sin. Does this help at all?

I can empathize with your situation. My fiance was raised UMC, and she’ll be starting RCIA in August 2014. She’s definitely had some ups and downs in her journey, but she’s come to peace with her decision. For her, it ultimately boiled down to the fact that Jesus founded the Catholic Church on Peter. Contemplating on this fact eventually softened her heart to understanding the other doctrines that strike Protestants as being a violation of Scripture. But each of our journeys is different, so I pray that yours leads to the peace that can only be found in Christ, and that the posters here at CAF can be good resources to you in your journey.

 

[MethodistEsq]

If you wouldn’t mind referring to our Church as the Catholic Church, or Roman Catholic Church, I think we would appreciate it.

Why, certainly. I think I acquired the habit some time after college where I may have been accustomed to saying, “The Greek church”, the “Corinthian church”, et cetera. Nevertheless, I’m mindful of your request. Be sure and rap my knuckles if I slip in the future, would you? I’d prefer not to agitate my hosts.

 

[MethodistEsq]

Welcome, It is always nice to see Methodists on CAF.

Ah, I thought I saw a new Methodist poster here. Welcome.

Anyways, welcome aboard! Until this thread I knew very little about the Methodists, and this is a learning experience for me as well.

Thank you, thank you all. If memory serves, the 2006 Seoul Report suggests that there is much to be gained by these sorts of things, so I’m glad to play a part in implementing their suggestions.

I’ve been plowing through the official UMC statement on Holy Communion and will have more to say, probably tomorrow, reflecting my impressions of that document. Elements of that have already appeared, but I’ll try and weave together something worth reading.

In the meantime, I appreciate the poster bringing the question of UMC Internet communion to my attention. That’s worth bringing up to my pastor and, if necessary, the district superintendent.