new to Catholic.com

[bayouman]

Hello everyone!

This is my first thread on Catholic.com. I am a Protestant Christian (United Methodist). If you have any questions about the practices or beliefs of the United Methodist Church, feel free to ask me anything.

 

[1edyson]

Welcome to CAF!

 

[SalomeBintullah]

I’ve got a question. My ex-boyfriend was raised Methodist and once expressed confusion over the Catholic belief that the Eucharist is literally Jesus’ body and blood, as opposed to just a symbol. However, when I looked up Methodist beliefs on Wikipedia (I know, not the most reliable source, lol) the impression I got was that Methodists believe that the bread and wine is more than just a symbol. Would you be able to clear up my confusion for me?

 

[bayouman]

I’ve got a question. My ex-boyfriend was raised Methodist and once expressed confusion over the Catholic belief that the Eucharist is literally Jesus’ body and blood, as opposed to just a symbol. However, when I looked up Methodist beliefs on Wikipedia (I know, not the most reliable source, lol) the impression I got was that Methodists believe that the bread and wine is more than just a symbol. Would you be able to clear up my confusion for me?

The Eucharist is seen only as a symbol of the body and blood of Christ in the United Methodist Church. This is what I have interpreted anyway, but when the bread and wine is given, the person handing these out says “The body of Christ broken for you”, and “The blood of Christ shed for you”.

 

[bayouman]

Welcome to CAF!

Thank you 1edyson.

 

[regression]

The Eucharist is seen only as a symbol of the body and blood of Christ in the United Methodist Church. This is what I have interpreted anyway, but when the bread and wine is given, the person handing these out says “The body of Christ broken for you”, and “The blood of Christ shed for you”.

Welcome. You weren’t on here long before you were helping out ha ha. Enjoy your stay here.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

The Eucharist is seen only as a symbol of the body and blood of Christ in the United Methodist Church. This is what I have interpreted anyway, but when the bread and wine is given, the person handing these out says “The body of Christ broken for you”, and “The blood of Christ shed for you”.

Bayouman,

Welcome to the forums. Is this the view of the UMC or just your personal view? What was John Wesley’s view on it?

God bless

 

[SalomeBintullah]

The Eucharist is seen only as a symbol of the body and blood of Christ in the United Methodist Church. This is what I have interpreted anyway, but when the bread and wine is given, the person handing these out says “The body of Christ broken for you”, and “The blood of Christ shed for you”.

Thank you!

 

[bayouman]

Thank you!

Your welcome.

 

[bayouman]

Bayouman,

Welcome to the forums. Is this the view of the UMC or just your personal view? What was John Wesley’s view on it?

God bless

This is just what I have interpreted from it. I will have to do some searching to see what John Wesley’s view on the Eucharist was, and then I will get back to you.

 

[bayouman]

This article has a paragraph about John Wesley’s view on the Eucharist.
christianity.wikia.com/wiki/Eucharist#Methodism:presence_as.22mystery.22

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

This is just what I have interpreted from it. I will have to do some searching to see what John Wesley’s view on the Eucharist was, and then I will get back to you.

Thank you bayouman. While you are researching John Wesley can you tell me what these paragraphs from UMC sources mean to you?

Jesus Christ, who “is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being” (Hebrews 1:3), is truly present in Holy Communion. Through Jesus Christ and in the power of the Holy Spirit, God meets us at the Table. God, who has given the sacraments to the church, acts in and through Holy Communion. Christ is present through the community gathered in Jesus’ name (Matthew 18:20), through the Word proclaimed and enacted, and through the elements of bread and wine shared (1 Corinthians 11:23-26). The divine presence is a living reality and can be experienced by participants; it is not a remembrance of the Last Supper and the Crucifixion only.

gbod.org/worship/thisholymystery/parttwo.html

Pour out your Holy Spirit on us gathered here,
and on these gifts of bread and wine.
Make them be for us the body and blood of Christ,
that we may be for the world the body of Christ,
redeemed by his blood.

revneal.org/communionlit1.html

Come and partake the gospel feast,
be saved from sin, in Jesus rest;
O taste the goodness of our God,
and eat his flesh and drink his blood.

en.wikisource.org/wiki/Come,_Sinners,to_the_Gospel_Feast(version_2)

God bless you

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

This article has a paragraph about John Wesley’s view on the Eucharist.
christianity.wikia.com/wiki/Eucharist#Methodism:presence_as.22mystery.22

Thank you bayouman.

From your article:

Methodism: presence as "mystery"The followers of John Wesley have typically affirmed that the grace of Christ is experienced via his real presence in the sacrament, but have allowed the details to remain a mystery, rejecting the doctrine of transubstantiation (see “Article XVIII” of the Articles of Religion, Means of Grace). In 2004, **the United Methodist Church more clearly defined its view of the sacrament and its belief in the Real Presence **in an official document entitled This Holy Mystery.

A rejection of transubstantiation does not equal the rejection of the Real Presence. This paragraph above, I do not feel, matches with what you said here:

The Eucharist is seen only as a symbol of the body and blood of Christ in the United Methodist Church. This is what I have interpreted anyway, but when the bread and wine is given, the person handing these out says “The body of Christ broken for you”, and “The blood of Christ shed for you”.

What I see the UMC saying is that, while transubstantiation is denied, the real presence, which is a mystery, is very much affirmed. Maybe you are in the wrong denomintation?

God bless you

 

[Eucharisted]

Why are Methodists called Methodists?

 

[GodIsGracious]

Why are Methodists called Methodists?

LOL. I was wondering that myself when, on the way to lunch, I saw a church with a sign that said, “First United Methodist Church.” I wondered why they called themselves Methodists. So, this is a question I have too.

Of course, here in Dallas we have Southern Methodist University - which President George Dubya Bush, Jr. is helping with their “libarry.”

 

[Stouts989]

Matthew 26:26-28

26 While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.”
27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you;
28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.

When Jesus says "this is My body and this is My blood.

Why should I take that literally? When Jesus spoke he used metaphors and parables all the time…why would this event be any different?

 

[Pax_Vobiscum_57]

Hi and welcome!

We hope that you feel free to ask us anything about our faith, too!

Look forward to “seeing” you here.

 

[GodIsGracious]

Why should I take that literally? When Jesus spoke he used metaphors and parables all the time…why would this event be any different?

Why would you take Matthew 1:24-25 literally then, as you are doing in the thread you started abut Mary’s virginity?

This is what I mean when I say that protestants “cherry pick” their “sola scriptura” beliefs.

 

[bayouman]

LOL. I was wondering that myself when, on the way to lunch, I saw a church with a sign that said, “First United Methodist Church.” I wondered why they called themselves Methodists. So, this is a question I have too.

Of course, here in Dallas we have Southern Methodist University - which President George Dubya Bush, Jr. is helping with their “libarry.”

Even I am not sure where the name “Methodist” comes from. On another note, I like your C.S. Lewis quote.

 

[bayouman]

Thank you bayouman.

From your article:

A rejection of transubstantiation does not equal the rejection of the Real Presence. This paragraph above, I do not feel, matches with what you said here:

What I see the UMC saying is that, while transubstantiation is denied, the real presence, which is a mystery, is very much affirmed. Maybe you are in the wrong denomintation?

God bless you

I don’t think I am in the wrong denomination. Every church, even those of the same denomination, seem to have different ideas, so while one church believes what the article said, another church might believe what I have interpreted. Maybe I have just misunderstood my church’s view on the Eucharist all along.