Methodists and the Real Presence

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randy_Carson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
EvangelCatholic said:
This is a thread on Methodists, who by the way, are in full communion with the ELCA; which means that they accept Real Presence. 👍
Click to expand...
I would hope so. For two Christian bodies to be in full communion without agreement on fundamental issues would be unionism, no?
 
P.S. Actually, though, the first part of your statement:
EvangelCatholic said:
This is a thread on Methodists, who by the way, are in full communion with the ELCA;
Click to expand...
is a bit prejudicial – not *all *Methodists are in full communion with the ELCA.
 
SteveVH said:
Do all those in ELCA “accept the Real Presence”?
Click to expand...
I guess that depends on how you mean. If you mean literally all, as in anyone who doesn’t would be excommunicated, then I’m 100% certain the answer is No.
 
SteveVH said:
Do all those in ELCA “accept the Real Presence”?
Click to expand...
Luther’s Catechism remains the standard curriculum for 1st Communion and Confirmation. All Lutheran clergy vow to follow the Augsburg Confession. :rolleyes:

But by establishing full communion on belief in the Catholic Creeds [Apostles, Nicene, Athansian], Lutherans are truly the via media in professing our Catholic faith to all Christians.
 
SteveVH said:
Notice, however, that the statement does not say “the real presence of Christ”. The Church has recognized a spiritual communion among non-Catholic faith traditions for some time. This is different than a one-flesh communion. I have not read his words in context so I’m pretty much speaking off the cuff. I will say that “the salvation-granting presence” is a strong statement.
Click to expand...
The quote says,
I count among the most important results of the ecumenical dialogues the insight that the issue of the eucharist cannot be narrowed to the problem of ‘validity.’ Even a theology oriented to the concept of succession, such as that which holds in the Catholic and in the Orthodox church, need not in any way deny the salvation-granting presence of the Lord [Heilschaffende Gegenwart des Herrn] in a Lutheran [evangelische] Lord’s Supper.

Since the context is validity, and since he believes that John 6 says we must eat His flesh, etc., it seems the real presence is what is meant by ‘salvation-granting’. That said, I suspect that there would be, in his thinking, nuances that would confirm the CC belief in a “difference” of some sort between this and a Catholic Eucharist.

Jon
 
EvangelCatholic said:
Luther’s Catechism remains the standard curriculum for 1st Communion and Confirmation. All Lutheran clergy vow to follow the Augsburg Confession. :rolleyes:

But by establishing full communion on belief in the Catholic Creeds [Apostles, Nicene, Athansian], Lutherans are truly the via media in professing our Catholic faith to all Christians.
Click to expand...
Likewise the Church of England, which remains orthodox, catholic and reformed in her official formularies, professing adherence to the Scriptures and the Catholic creeds despite the best efforts of many, many unorthodox, anti-Catholic and theologically de-formed bishops, clerics and laypeople within her ranks.
 
Novocastrian said:
Likewise the Church of England, which remains orthodox, catholic and reformed in her official formularies, professing adherence to the Scriptures and the Catholic creeds despite the best efforts of many, many unorthodox, anti-Catholic and theologically de-formed bishops, clerics and laypeople within her ranks.
Click to expand...
Yes, the development of full-communion of Anglican/ Lutheran [Provoo Communion/ Called to Common Mission]. When all Anglicans and Lutherans unite that will be 150 million Christians walking toward Rome.
 
JonNC said:
Indeed. To my knowledge, the CC has never made a statement regarding those Lutheran synods that did maintain AS. Then there is the statement by Cardinal Ratzinger which allows that “the salvation-granting presence” of Christ is in a Lutheran Lord’s Supper.
OTOH, I can’t imagine the CC stating that Lutheran presbyter ordinations are valid, except perhaps at a time when unity was imminent.

Jon
Click to expand...
I hope you are not inferring the Church looks upon the Lutheran Eucharist as valid. If you are, your inference would not be consistent with Catholic teaching.
 
concretecamper said:
I hope you are not inferring the Church looks upon the Lutheran Eucharist as valid. If you are, your inference would not be consistent with Catholic teaching.
Click to expand...
If the definite article is there in the then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s statement, I don’t see why you’d take issue with it and make it bold font.
 
concretecamper said:
I hope you are not inferring the Church looks upon the Lutheran Eucharist as valid. If you are, your inference would not be consistent with Catholic teaching.
Click to expand...
I am not inferring anything. At the time, the good Cardinal did not speak for the Church. He spoke for himself. And it is clear that, regardless of “validity”, he felt that a Lutheran Eucharist was more than a nothing, more than wafer and wine, and more than “where two or more are gathered…”.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
The quote says,
I count among the most important results of the ecumenical dialogues the insight that the issue of the eucharist cannot be narrowed to the problem of ‘validity.’ Even a theology oriented to the concept of succession, such as that which holds in the Catholic and in the Orthodox church, need not in any way deny the salvation-granting presence of the Lord [Heilschaffende Gegenwart des Herrn] in a Lutheran [evangelische] Lord’s Supper.

Since the context is validity, and since he believes that John 6 says we must eat His flesh, etc., it seems the real presence is what is meant by ‘salvation-granting’. That said, I suspect that there would be, in his thinking, nuances that would confirm the CC belief in a “difference” of some sort between this and a Catholic Eucharist.

Jon
Click to expand...
Thanks, Jon. I appreciate the rest of the comment. Now I have to really take a look at this (thanks a lot :D). Seriously, very interesting. It would be useful to know more of his thoughts on the matter. How far does this apply? Can we say the same thing about a Methodist communion or a Presbyterian communion? If succession and “validity” is not the problem then where is the problem? Just some questions I need to answer for myself.

Things that make you go hmmmmmm…
 
.even though it can be efficacious in bringing one closer to God…validity matters most

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android
 
EvangelCatholic said:
Sorry my friend, but the obstacle you cling to is inconsistent with the Vatican.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm…please show me your backup for this claim. Remember that validity is a lot more than Apostolic succession.

And BTW…validity is not the only obstacle. Trent outlines a few more…but we will not go there for sake of being ecumenical. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top