Non-Catholics: What would you do?

[Nine_Two]

This Orthodox beleives in transubstantiation!

It is another one of those things that has been left undefined, though it is certainly consistent with Patristics, and the Catholics dogmatized it under circumstances consistent with other dogmas - that is that the idea was being attacked from what was then ‘within’ the Church.
When it comes to our negotiations, I’ve never heard of it being a big deal.

 

[JonNC]

It is another one of those things that has been left undefined, though it is certainly consistent with Patristics, and the Catholics dogmatized it under circumstances consistent with other dogmas - that is that the idea was being attacked from what was then ‘within’ the Church.
When it comes to our negotiations, I’ve never heard of it being a big deal.

Nine Two and Andrew,

What’s your take on this:

. Orthodox and Lutherans agree, whether they use the language of “metabole” or of “real presence”, that the bread and wine do not lose their essence (physis) when becoming sacramentally Christ’s body and blood. The medieval doctrine of transsubstantiation is rejected by both Orthodox and Lutherans.

helsinki.fi/~risaarin/lutortjointtext.html#euch

Jon

 

[andrewstx]

Nine Two and Andrew,

What’s your take on this:

helsinki.fi/~risaarin/lutortjointtext.html#euch

Jon

I can’t speak for ninetwo. but I personally beleive that the entire substance of the bread and wine is transformed into the body and blood of Our Lord with only appearences remaining unchanged.

Jon what I suspect you are refering to is what some mistakenly call “consubstantiation”. All the metaphysical descriptions of the Eucharist frankly confuse me and I prefer to think of the Eucharist as a sacred mystery taking Our Lord at his word.

But if one has to pin me down I think transubtantiation makes the most sense. Orthodox don’t overly involve themselves with logic and specific definitions for everything as much as western Christians.

 

[Nine_Two]

Nine Two and Andrew,

What’s your take on this:

helsinki.fi/~risaarin/lutortjointtext.html#euch

Jon

If I remember my Greek correctly, Metabolos roughly means the same thing as transubstantiation.

Personally I think it is something that is not worth arguing about. Christ is really present within the bread and wine. The method and means are irrelevant insofar as I am concerned.
I simply believe that given the circumstances the Catholic Church had no alternative but to define it.

 

[ThatOrthodoxGuy]

To all non catholic christians: What would you do if your church decided to unite with the RCC? I know its not likely in many groups, but still.

Welcome it with open arms:thumbsup:

 

[hn160]

Most Catholic parishes I have been to have coffee and donuts after Mass. Or tea and lassy buns.

Then that closes the gap between Catholics and Lutherans, but we still have the potluck problem.

 

[JonNC]

I can’t speak for ninetwo. but I personally beleive that the entire substance of the bread and wine is transformed into the body and blood of Our Lord with only appearences remaining unchanged.

Jon what I suspect you are refering to is what some mistakenly call “consubstantiation”. All the metaphysical descriptions of the Eucharist frankly confuse me and I prefer to think of the Eucharist as a sacred mystery taking Our Lord at his word.
But if one has to pin me down I think transubtantiation makes the most sense. Orthodox don’t overly involve themselves with logic and specific definitions for everything as much as western Christians.

I’m sorry I wasn’t clear, Andrew. I wanted your thoughts on what the statement says regarding Orthodoxy rejecting transubstantiation. Is that a doctrinally accurate statement by the dialogue group?

On the bolded, this is precisely my view. Even Luther’s Sacramental Union seems an unnecessary trek into explaining a mystery.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

If I remember my Greek correctly, Metabolos roughly means the same thing as transubstantiation.

Personally I think it is something that is not worth arguing about. Christ is really present within the bread and wine. The method and means are irrelevant insofar as I am concerned.
I simply believe that given the circumstances the Catholic Church had no alternative but to define it.

So, you would say the doctrinal definition is not Church dividing? Is the statement by the dialogue group, that Orthodoxy rejected Transub. essentially correct?

I actually agree that it should not be Church dividing, even for Lutherans.
Jon

 

[Nine_Two]

So, you would say the doctrinal definition is not Church dividing? Is the statement by the dialogue group, that Orthodoxy rejected Transub. essentially correct?

I actually agree that it should not be Church dividing, even for Lutherans.
Jon

I’m not sure I can interpret that document as rejecting transubstantiation, it just seems to be refusing to get into the specifics of it, which I think is the position we should be taking.

 

[Snowwhite16]

I was raised in the United Church of Christ for the record. I am now Catholic and attending classes. It might be helpful for the readers to know that I was a non-Catholic “forever” on paper.

If all churches decided to join with the Catholic Church I would have to say “it was about time”.

As child and an adult every Sunday we would say “I believe in one Holy Catholic Church”…etc. during the creed. I would shift my eyes back and forth and question in my mind, why are we saying this if we are not catholic? Little did I know that the UCC and most other branches are just that…branches broken off from the Catholic Church. Such as Martin Luther for example.

For those who make that decision to become Catholic such as I have you will come to realize that you are finally at home.

 

[Anna_Scott]

To all non catholic christians: What would you do if your church decided to unite with the RCC? I know its not likely in many groups, but still.

traillius,
Actually, some Anglicans are entering the Catholic Church.

However, I remain unconvinced of the Papal claim of authority and infallible Ex Cathedra teachings. Since, I cannot “submit religious mind and will to the Roman Pontiff” (which is required of all Catholics, even when he is not speaking Ex Cathedra), I’d have to look for another Church. I would consider the Eastern Orthodox Church.

 

[andrewstx]

I’m sorry I wasn’t clear, Andrew. I wanted your thoughts on what the statement says regarding Orthodoxy rejecting transubstantiation. Is that a doctrinally accurate statement by the dialogue group?

On the bolded, this is precisely my view. Even Luther’s Sacramental Union seems an unnecessary trek into explaining a mystery.

Jon

I read the long Helsinki statement, and I for the most part agree. Orthodox are not so precise and dare I say with appologies “legalistic”.

There have been statements by Orthodox bishops who seem to agree with transubstantiation, but don’t agree with the metaphysical language of substance and accidents. We have no pope and we don’t all agree completely. So you could say I believe in transubstantiation in the Orthodox sense.

I do not agree with Luther’s “in with and under” language, I think even that is bordering on the metaphysical. I just trust Jesus when he says “this is my body, and blood”.

Do Lutherans beleive that the presence last for only the time of the service, and reverts to ordinary bread afterward?

In the Orthodox church we belive that the change is permenent and we reserve the sacrament to give the sick and the Liturgy of the Presanctifed. We don’t use it for other purposes like benediction.

 

[FrRob]

I would give thanks that five hundred years of separation would be coming to an end.

Well, Gary, maybe it is time for you to found the"Lutheran Rite" of the Catholic Church, with it’s own distinct structure and liturgy, but still undeniably part of the Catholic Church.



Rob

 

[FrRob]

Then that closes the gap between Catholics and Lutherans, but we still have the potluck problem.

Perhaps we should convene a council.

But I don’t think we could ever come to an agreement over the Lutefisk controversy.

On that one, I think it is simply Divinely Revealed that those €$&#% Lutherans are . . . just . . .wrong . . .



Rob

 

[FrRob]

Well, Gary, maybe it is time for you to found the"Lutheran Rite" of the Catholic Church, with it’s own distinct structure and liturgy, but still undeniably part of the Catholic Church.



Rob

Argh.

“Its.”

“Its!”

“ITS!”

(My HS English teacher would be rolling in her grave. If she were dead.)

Rob

 

[Zulfiqar]

I . . . would be exceedingly happy. I have been going to an Episcopal church for the past few weeks - the same one I was baptized in. It’s very nice, but I still feel like it’s missing something. I really have got to get myself to a Catholic church, but I am so scared. :S

 

[FrRob]

I was raised in the United Church of Christ for the record. I am now Catholic and attending classes. It might be helpful for the readers to know that I was a non-Catholic “forever” on paper.

If all churches decided to join with the Catholic Church I would have to say “it was about time”.

As child and an adult every Sunday we would say “I believe in one Holy Catholic Church”…etc. during the creed. I would shift my eyes back and forth and question in my mind, why are we saying this if we are not catholic? Little did I know that the UCC and most other branches are just that…branches broken off from the Catholic Church. Such as Martin Luther for example.

For those who make that decision to become Catholic such as I have you will come to realize that you are finally at home.

Well . . .

That part of the Creed is “catholic” with a small “c.”

As much as everyone always wants to define that word as “Universal,” I greatly prefer to define it as “all-encompassing.”

That is to say, “All are called to salvation in Jesus Christ. Man, woman, young, old, servant, free, Jew, Gentile . . .ALL.”

In that sense, ALL Christian churches nowadays are essentially “catholic.” Any that would EXCLUDE any particular class or group from salvation, not being catholic (Note the small “c,” as it is EXTREMELY important) would also NOT be truly Christian.

Rob

 

[FrRob]

I . . . would be exceedingly happy. I have been going to an Episcopal church for the past few weeks - the same one I was baptized in. It’s very nice, but I still feel like it’s missing something. I really have got to get myself to a Catholic church, but I am so scared. :S

Scared?

Scared of what?

Give the priest, or the director of religious education a call.

You might also give a daily mass a try, as it might feel a little less intimidadting.

Be sure to look about for a missal, which could help you follow along with the mass parts, until you get to know them a little better.

I would hope everyone would be very welcoming!

Peace, and may God help you on your journey!

Fr. Rob

 

[FrRob]

I would rejoice! I’m working toward converting to the RCC and would love it! Please pray for me that I will be a Catholic soon! I’m praying the Rosary and reading Catholicism for Dummies, The Word Among Us, Catechism of the Catholic Church and the New American Bible trying to educate myself all I can.

Hey, Duckie!

I hope you have been in contact with the priest or director of religious education at your local parish.

You really should not be too late for this year’s RCIA classes, which I really
think could help you on your faith journey, as you would have a chance to have questions answered, share faith with others who are considering converting, and get to know members of your local parish.

The Catholic faith is best learned as a shared-faith journey, since it is, at heart, a shared-faith journey!

May God bless you on your road!

Fr. Rob
(Your neighbor, in the Diocese of Tulsa)

 

[Nine_Two]

Well . . .

That part of the Creed is “catholic” with a small “c.”

As much as everyone always wants to define that word as “Universal,” I greatly prefer to define it as “all-encompassing.”

That is to say, “All are called to salvation in Jesus Christ. Man, woman, young, old, servant, free, Jew, Gentile . . .ALL.”

In that sense, ALL Christian churches nowadays are essentially “catholic.” Any that would EXCLUDE any particular class or group from salvation, not being catholic (Note the small “c,” as it is EXTREMELY important) would also NOT be truly Christian.

Rob

Yet the Creed itself was written to exclude Arians.

So were the writers of the Creed not Christian, and if not can you really be Christian if you follow it?

Such a line of thinking opens up a number of difficulties. Clearly not all who came to be Christian are “catholic”.