No Real Presence of Jesus Christ in Protestant Churches

[Randy_Carson]

A plain reading of the rest of John explains this very SPIRITUAL process of eating the flesh and blood.

Oh, well. I guess this answers every question, doesn’t it?

Tell me, did you come up with the bogus argument in your signature on your own or did you read it in a book?

If the latter, would you please provide the title and author’s name? (Yes, I know you got the verses from the Bible…I’m wondering if the arrangement of the argument was contained in a book you have read or if this represenst your own reasoning.)

If the former, then I have to ask this question: Why do you suppose that no one has seriously suggested this argument previously? I have never heard it (though I do not claim to have confronted every possible theory advanced against the Church), but if it provides an “open and shut” case for Protestants as you seem to be crowing about, I’m wondering why EVERY Protestant is not using this line of reasoning in their first line of argumentation against Catholic doctrine. Hmmm…

And if no serious Protestant scholar is championing this argument, one has to ask why not?

 

[johnstown_johnn]

I’m sorry, but it’s simply not true that our Lord is not present in Protestant churches!
First of all, because of the fact that where two or three are gathered in His name, there He himself is there among them (as He has promised), and secondly:

At least in Lutheran doctrine, the Holy Communion IS a sacrament, alongside Baptism.
I myself consider the Holy Communion as the highlight of the service, not counting the sermon, because it is where we recieve the body and blood of our Savior.

One of the founding written confessions of the Lutheran Church, Confessio Augustana, has this to say about the Holy Communion:
(my own translation from Danish)

Protestants do NOT have Apostolic succession. Martin Luther and other so-called reformers broke from the Church. Since martin Luther and the others as well were not even bishops they could NOT ordain new priests. Mertin Luther’s “church” died when he died since there was no authority for continuity.

Thus, they do NOT have the power to Consecrate the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ.

So, in a way, they may be experiencing some sort of “spiritual” exercise but it is NOT actual. No offense to our wonderful protestant friends here. but truth is truth.

“Of the Holy Communion, they [the Lutheran congregations] teach that the body and blood of Christ is indeed present and is given the particioners during the meal. And they frown upon them that teach otherwise”

So Christ is indeed present in at least ONE of the protestant churches

Peace of God with you all

Mark

 

[twk001]

I agree with Mark. Again, I am currently a catholic who is seriously considering joining the lutheran church near me. I think it is both ridiculous and SAD that everyone here can’t respect the teachings and beliefs of non-Catholic churches. All my life, from all of the Catholics I know, I have constantly been told how the “protestants hate us and are out to get us”. Maybe if catholics wouldn’t have such a HUGE 'We have the real deal and you all don’t" attitude, other religions wouldn’t be so put off. this belief comes across as complete errogance. I may sound very simple in my beliefs, but I truly believe that faith is more about your personal relationship with jesus christ, and less about what building you go to. Oh, and by the way, the Lutheran church DOES celebrate the SACREMENT of communion, and they do beleive that Jesus is present in the body and blood. Sadly, I think that this type of argument is one of the very basic problems with the Catholic church. the church is not any better than any other christian church. I find it almost humurous that it seems that EVERY other faith can tell you WHY they believe in their faith and their relationship with Jesus Christ, yet most Catholics can’t. That’s probably why is makes way more sense for the Lutherans to confirm teenagers-when they actually know what confirmation means- than to confirm 2nd graders like my diocese. They have NO CLUE! twk

 

[Randy_Carson]

I agree with Mark. Again, I am currently a catholic who is seriously considering joining the lutheran church near me. I think it is both ridiculous and SAD that everyone here can’t respect the teachings and beliefs of non-Catholic churches.

We respect the people of all faiths. We do not respect all faiths.

All my life, from all of the Catholics I know, I have constantly been told how the “protestants hate us and are out to get us”. Maybe if catholics wouldn’t have such a HUGE 'We have the real deal and you all don’t" attitude, other religions wouldn’t be so put off. this belief comes across as complete errogance. I may sound very simple in my beliefs, but I truly believe that faith is more about your personal relationship with jesus christ, and less about what building you go to.

This seems to suggest that one or the other is true when in fact, both are important. Your personal relationship with Jesus is important. So is your relationship to his body, the Church, which He Himself founded.

Oh, and by the way, the Lutheran church DOES celebrate the SACREMENT of communion, and they do beleive that Jesus is present in the body and blood. Sadly, I think that this type of argument is one of the very basic problems with the Catholic church. the church is not any better than any other christian church.

I know what they believer and I know why, sadly, they are in error. It does not matter a whit as to what they believer; all that matters is what is objectively true. See Mormonism for further examples of this concept…

I find it almost humurous that it seems that EVERY other faith can tell you WHY they believe in their faith and their relationship with Jesus Christ, yet most Catholics can’t. That’s probably why is makes way more sense for the Lutherans to confirm teenagers-when they actually know what confirmation means- than to confirm 2nd graders like my diocese. They have NO CLUE! twk

So, by your own words, do you condemn your own understanding of the faith? How old were you when you last spent anytime learning what the Church actually teaches? Were you a second-grader, also?

That aside, this Catholic (and many others) will be happy to attempt to provide answers to any question you might ask.

Please feel free to start as many threads as you like in the Apologetics forum…one topic per thread, please.

See you there! :tiphat:

 

[pprimeau1976]

A plain reading of the rest of John explains this very SPIRITUAL process of eating the flesh and blood.

You say that based on your personal interpretation of scripture. You have about 1,974 years separating your interpretation from the time Christ said those words. Why not trust in someone else’s interpretation from the year 150?

Wouldn’t it be fair to say that their interpretation is more in line with what Jesus actually said? Don’t you think they would have a better understanding than you?

 

[twk001]

Just to clarify for those wondering, no, I was not confirmed as a second grader. i was confirmed at the age of 16 and and had a quite profound experience in coming to know Jesus during this time. I also have had formal Youth Ministry training through the Centers For Ministry Development and have completed the 2 year certificate program and worked as a youth minister in a catholic parish for 6 years. I also have certification in Pastoral Ministry and completed that training at a local catholic university. Additionally, I am also a graduate of the 4-year Lay Ministry program in my diocese. So yes, I do have a little bit of training. I certainly wasn’t in second grade the last time I learned about the catholic church. twk

 

[pprimeau1976]

The reverence that the Orthodox have for the Holy of Holies is certainly different than the RCC displays.

Amen to that. John Paul II even wrote about the reverence the Orthodox have toward it in “Crossing the Threshold of Hope.” I even experienced it myself as I served as a witness for my brother-in-law, who married a Greek-Orthodox woman. It was wonderful to see. By your impeccable grammar, I would assume you understand what it means to “stand up” in a wedding. I stood up for 2+ hours.

The amount of harm that it does to a persons soul, to partake of communion, without being prepared, is unmeasruable. Thus the priest has a responsiblity to the unprepared, as well as to the prepared.

I agree to a certain extent. You say the word “prepared” but from what Paul said about receiving the bread, he said we must not eat it “unworthily.” The difficulty with Paul’s words is that it is a subjective term. What does it mean to be unworthy? And can our bishops and priests truly determine who is worthy? I could be wrong, but to me, the Pharisees concerned themselves with who was worthy to do this and worthy to do that. Should our bishops and priests exhibit the same attitudes? I think these attitudes are healthy to have, but they should primarily come from the individual receiving the Eucharist, not the person giving it.

My understanding about the Eucharist is that it is Jesus’ body, blood, soul, and divinity. I believe this to be true because Christ said it was true. Christ sought out the sinners, tax collectors, prostitutes, and ate with them. Were they worthy by our definition? Probably not. Did his presence despite their unworthiness defile their souls? Absolutely not! If our faith is so strong in the real presence, what is the difference between then and now?

All the more reason not to alter church tradition…The Catholics use to have everyone “confirmed” within the first year of life.

I will grant you that it is puzzling as to why confirmation and baptism are spaced out why they still use chrism at the baptism. I don’t think this has caused confusion amongst the protestants. I think pride that existed then and the pride that exists now prohibits people from even wanting to understand.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Just to clarify for those wondering, no, I was not confirmed as a second grader. i was confirmed at the age of 16 and and had a quite profound experience in coming to know Jesus during this time. I also have had formal Youth Ministry training through the Centers For Ministry Development and have completed the 2 year certificate program and worked as a youth minister in a catholic parish for 6 years. I also have certification in Pastoral Ministry and completed that training at a local catholic university. Additionally, I am also a graduate of the 4-year Lay Ministry program in my diocese. So yes, I do have a little bit of training. I certainly wasn’t in second grade the last time I learned about the catholic church. twk

Most excellent!

So, in your estimation as a trained professional with years of pastoral experience, why do you think that many Catholics are ignorant of basic Christian and Catholic doctrine?

 

[icxc_nika]

Amen to that. John Paul II even wrote about the reverence the Orthodox have toward it in “Crossing the Threshold of Hope.” I even experienced it myself as I served as a witness for my brother-in-law, who married a Greek-Orthodox woman. It was wonderful to see. By your impeccable grammar, I would assume you understand what it means to “stand up” in a wedding. I stood up for 2+ hours.

I don’t know if you’re joking or not, but I have never been accused of having impeccable grammer. My grammer is even worse than my spelling! Thank God my strengths were in the sciences!

I agree to a certain extent. You say the word “prepared” but from what Paul said about receiving the bread, he said we must not eat it “unworthily.” The difficulty with Paul’s words is that it is a subjective term. What does it mean to be unworthy? And can our bishops and priests truly determine who is worthy? I could be wrong, but to me, the Pharisees concerned themselves with who was worthy to do this and worthy to do that. Should our bishops and priests exhibit the same attitudes? I think these attitudes are healthy to have, but they should primarily come from the individual receiving the Eucharist, not the person giving it.

I was careful not to use worthy, because the bottmom line is … nobody is worthy. it’s only by his great mercy that we are even allowed to approach. Thus my statements with the preparedness.

I keep forgetting, but in the RCC, almost everyone receives communion every Sunday. This is in no way the case in the Orthodox church’s. Sadly, because of the issues regarding the strict fasting, confession, etc, many Orthodox faithful will partake in communion no more than 4 times a year!

Most of the more devout are partaking at least once a month, but most will not be partaking ever week.

Preparing for the eucharist is a very big deal. Not to say that the RC do not take it seriously, however, the fasting from food, relations, thoughts, situations, are very much a part of the preperation. And frankly, it i a lot for the average person, living a secular life, to avoid.

Going back to the worthiness, it is a requirment of every priest dispensing the eucharist that he knows that the partaker has prepared properly. It is easy to do this in most parishes, however if a stranger walks into an Orthodox church, and the priest has never seen you, you very well may be asked several questions, while standing in line, bfore he allows you to partake.

Judging the worthiness is not a component, the priests say in their silent rayers how unworthy the are themselves. The worthiness issue is moot, as you know if you have been contrite enough to recieve.

My understanding about the Eucharist is that it is Jesus’ body, blood, soul, and divinity. I believe this to be true because Christ said it was true. Christ sought out the sinners, tax collectors, prostitutes, and ate with them. Were they worthy by our definition? Probably not. Did his presence despite their unworthiness defile their souls? Absolutely not! If our faith is so strong in the real presence, what is the difference between then and now?

Again, worthiness not an issue.

cont.

 

[icxc_nika]

I will grant you that it is puzzling as to why confirmation and baptism are spaced out why they still use chrism at the baptism. I don’t think this has caused confusion amongst the protestants. I think pride that existed then and the pride that exists now prohibits people from even wanting to understand.

The Eastern Christian Bishops, in the early church, allowed the priest to perform the christmation"confirmation", at the time of the baptism. When the church was getting bigger, it was impractical for the bishop to be around fr every baptism. Thus the allowed the priests to administer this sacrement as well.

In the Western Church’s, a different tradition developed.
The local bishop would come into each town at least once a year, and confirm/chrismate each infant. Thus by the time everyone was 1 yr. old, they were confirmed, and were able to participate in the other sacrements. ( including communion ) The isue of receiving communion is much easier n the early church / Orthodox tradition. Since the chalice contains the wine, with floating peices of bread ( body/blood ) the preist uses a long spoon, take a small crumb of bread, and small teaspoon size amount of blod, and delivers it to your mouth. Thus every week when we take our infant for communion, she can easily recieve.

Continuing with the early church tradition, and not altering it, the Orthodox maintain that one can not take part in any other sacrement unless they are fully received into the church.

In fact, every Orthodox church has the Narthex. It is the area where candles are lit, and icons are placed, prior to entering
the temple. In the early church, the narthex was much larger. If you were not a full member of the church, you could not even enter the church and partake of the service. We don’t pray with those who are not Orthodox, never have. The Catholic church was very adimant about this point as well until quite recently.

As our protestant friends can see, praying, sacrements, and every aspect of our church life has been taken extremely seriously for 2,000 years. Why do we not “respect” all other denominations.
Primarily because they either teach a false Christ, or worship incorrectly / inappropriately. Only through a tremendous amount of mercy do the Orthodox have any hope of salvation, let alone non-orthodox.

 

[johnstown_johnn]

Receiving the Sacrament “unworthily” means one who is currently in the state of mortal sin.

“Unworthily” is not a barometer of our humility…it is MORTAL SIN. From that we commit a sacrilege if that is the case.

 

[icxc_nika]

Receiving the Sacrament “unworthily” means one who is currently in the state of mortal sin.

“Unworthily” is not a barometer of our humility…it is MORTAL SIN. From that we commit a sacrilege if that is the case.

We have slightly different takes on the matter of “mortal sin”.
Our point continues to be that no one is “worthy” to receive, but that really isn’t my point with some of these issues.

 

[MarisStella]

I agree with Mark. Again, I am currently a catholic who is seriously considering joining the lutheran church near me. I think it is both ridiculous and SAD that everyone here can’t respect the teachings and beliefs of non-Catholic churches. All my life, from all of the Catholics I know, I have constantly been told how the “protestants hate us and are out to get us”. Maybe if catholics wouldn’t have such a HUGE 'We have the real deal and you all don’t" attitude, other religions wouldn’t be so put off. this belief comes across as complete errogance. I may sound very simple in my beliefs, but I truly believe that faith is more about your personal relationship with jesus christ, and less about what building you go to. Oh, and by the way, the Lutheran church DOES celebrate the SACREMENT of communion, and they do beleive that Jesus is present in the body and blood. Sadly, I think that this type of argument is one of the very basic problems with the Catholic church. the church is not any better than any other christian church. I find it almost humurous that it seems that EVERY other faith can tell you WHY they believe in their faith and their relationship with Jesus Christ, yet most Catholics can’t. That’s probably why is makes way more sense for the Lutherans to confirm teenagers-when they actually know what confirmation means- than to confirm 2nd graders like my diocese. They have NO CLUE! twk

I hope I can speak for other Catholics when I say that we do respect people of all beliefs, whether they are Lutheran or Mormon or Muslim. But we don’t believe that they are all correct in what they believe, say, and do (and I’m sure you don’t either).
As Catholics, we believe that Jesus is who He said He was, and His Church is who she says she is. When you think about it, they are both pretty outrageous claims, aren’t they?!
The truth is the truth whether you believe or I believe it or anyone believes it.
Hilaire Belloc wrote in 1938, “There is, as everybody knows, an institution proclaiming itself today the sole authoritative and divinely appointed teacher of essential morals and essential doctrine. This institution calls itself the Catholic Church.
This is further an admitted historical truth, which no one denies, that such an institution putting forth such a claim has been present among mankind for very many centuries. Many, through antagonism or lack of knowledge, deny the reality of the Catholic Church today with the original Christian society. No one, however hostile or uninstructed, will deny its presence during at least thirteen or fourteen hundred years.”
As orthodox Catholics (and as you pointed out and we all know quite well, there are many who are cafeteria Catholics), we have learned to love and place our trust in Jesus Christ, most importantly, but also His Church.
Many of us, (including me), floundered around for many years before we came to the humbling conclusion that we had not the time nor the ability nor the guidance of the Holy Spirit (in our personal lives, yes, but not in universal issues of faith and morals) to be our own authority.
We are sinners, not any better than any other Christian (or non-Christian) out there. But, as Catholics, we do know, we do believe, we do trust that we have the fullness of the faith that Jesus Christ intended for His flock. Praise God, He did NOT leave us to fend for ourselves! This Catholic Church has existed for 2,000 years despite heresy, despite schism, despite the sinfulness of its all-too-human leaders and members. No human being can take credit; it could only be the work of the Holy Spirit!

 

[stbruno]

Question to our Protestant cousins…What do you do with your unused Bread and wine (grape juice) after your Communion Services?

When I asked this…most respond, we toss it out.

Well, if it is truly Jesus how could you? We as Catholics believe in Transubstantiation…The Eucharist becomes Jesus at Consecration and remains Jesus…that’s why we protect the undistributed Eucharist in the Tabernacle of our churches. That’s why we can bring Viaticum to the dying!

Praise God for this heavenly banquet!

 

[johnstown_johnn]

We have slightly different takes on the matter of “mortal sin”.
Our point continues to be that no one is “worthy” to receive, but that really isn’t my point with some of these issues.

Three things necessary to comprise a Mortal Sin:

1. A grievous matter
2. Sufficient reflection
3. Full consent of the will.

So tell us, what constitutes a mortal sin for YOU ?

 

[icxc_nika]

Three things necessary to comprise a Mortal Sin:

1. A grievous matter
2. Sufficient reflection
3. Full consent of the will.

So tell us, what constitutes a mortal sin for YOU ?

Orthodox tend not to seperate the sins into the categories of venial or mortal.

Although for simplicity sake, I have heard orthodox priests reference it as a means to explain some matters, regarding confession, to the laity here in the Western cultures.

Many people here state side, are aware enough of the Catholic notions of venial / mortal, that it can be used as a reference point.

This however is a post schism development in definition, and really has no significant bearing in our relations.

 

[Contarini]

Orthodox tend not to seperate the sins into the categories of venial or mortal.

Although for simplicity sake, I have heard orthodox priests reference it as a means to explain some matters, regarding confession, to the laity here in the Western cultures…

Luther took a similar approach–in principle he rejected the distinction (since all sins were mortal by nature and all sins of believers were covered by the blood of Christ) but in a pastoral context he thought it was useful.

Edwin

 

[icxc_nika]

Luther took a similar approach–in principle he rejected the distinction (since all sins were mortal by nature and all sins of believers were covered by the blood of Christ) but in a pastoral context he thought it was useful.

Edwin

Your comment is foolish, please consider your audiance.

Nothing that the Orthodox teach about sin and sinning has changed since the early church. Because the Catholics choose to define it, and develop it in a particular way, hundreds of years later, does not somehow reduce the teachings of Orthodoxy, or the early church.

This would be tantamount to herecy, and your church leaders teach otherwise. You should know better than to compare the Orthodox to the Lutherans.

 

[icxc_nika]

Your comment is foolish, please consider your audiance.

Nothing that the Orthodox teach about sin and sinning has changed since the early church. Because the Catholics choose to define it, and develop it in a particular way, hundreds of years later, does not somehow reduce the teachings of Orthodoxy, or the early church.

This would be tantamount to herecy, and your church leaders teach otherwise. You should know better than to compare the Orthodox to the Lutherans.

My bad.

I should have looked at your profile.

Please forgive my rudeness.

 

[Contarini]

Your comment is foolish, please consider your audiance.

Oh, I did. Do not be so charitable as to assume that I am only annoying by accident

This would be tantamount to herecy, and your church leaders teach otherwise.

Otherwise than what? What church leaders?

You should know better than to compare the Orthodox to the Lutherans.

My point was simply that the mortal/venial distinction is indeed useful pastorally, even if you have some problems with it theoretically.

Orthodoxy and Lutheranism may have more in common than you think!

Edwin