The Eucharist in Lutheran and other protestant religions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter k5thbeatle
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
k5thbeatle said:
I hope someone can help me but I am looking for a little insight as to exactly what Lutherans (and other protestant religions I suppose) exactly believe in regards to their communion/Eucharist service? And I guess as a follow up what is the truth regarding this?

Thanks
Click to expand...
What Lutherans believe concerning the Eucharist is something that you need to ask a particular Lutheran. Lutherans follow Sola Scriptura and believe in private interpretation of Scripture. Therefore, they generally follow their own opinions.

Some Lutherans have told me it was symbolic.
Some have told me that they believe in the Real Presence, but they don’t believe in Transubstantiation. They believe the bread and wine remain in the Sacrament.

If you want to know what the Church leaders officially claim that Lutheranism teaches on the Eucharist, you might want to read the Book of Concord.
Welcome to the Book of Concord
bookofconcord.org/
The Book of Concord - the Confessions of the Lutheran Church.
‎A Brief Introduction to the Book … · ‎Book of Concord FAQ · ‎Solid Declaration
Click to expand...
 
De_Maria said:
Are you telling someone that you know more about what they believe than they do?
Click to expand...
I think he is, like all of us, shocked since Lutherans typically don’t go around preaching on Indian nature spirits, but that’s just me.
 
Last edited:
It doesn’t matter. It’s a rule that he claims to live by. If he imposes it on others, he should live by it.

By the way, is there a Lutheran here preaching on Indian nature spirits?
 
De_Maria said:
It doesn’t matter. It’s a rule that he claims to live by. If he imposes it on others, he should live by it.
Click to expand...
JonNC, as I recall, was/is a Lutheran. Are you telling him he doesn’t know what “high church Lutheranism” is?
De_Maria said:
By the way, is there a Lutheran here preaching on Indian nature spirits?
Click to expand...
Imtrying said:
we only received instruction about church history and the trinity, a group within the church claimed the trinity was a collection of Indian nature spirits, who controlled the air, earth, and water.
Click to expand...
All JonNC was doing was pointing out that this is not Lutheranism by any definition. I think most reasonable people who have any knowledge of Lutheranism would agree with him.
 
Last edited:
ltwin said:
40.png
k5thbeatle:
I hope someone can help me but I am looking for a little insight as to exactly what Lutherans (and other protestant religions I suppose) exactly believe in regards to their communion/Eucharist service? And I guess as a follow up what is the truth regarding this?
Click to expand...
JohnNC has answered your question in regards to Lutheranism.
Click to expand...
He answered with regards to what the Lutheran confession says. But Lutherans also believe in Sola Scriptura and private interpretation of Scripture, don’t they?

And what do they put above the Confessions?
Luther On The Bible - Word of God Lutheran Church
wordofgodlutheran.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/lutheronthebible.pdf
Scripture must be the reigning queen; all must obey her and be subject to her. They must not be her masters, judges, or jurors, but only her witnesses, pupils, and confessors, no matter who they are, whether the pope, or Luther, or Augustine, or Paul, or an angel from heaven. Nor must any other doctrine be proclaimed or …
Click to expand...
 
ltwin said:
40.png
De_Maria:
It doesn’t matter. It’s a rule that he claims to live by. If he imposes it on others, he should live by it.
Click to expand...
JonNC, as I recall, was/is a Lutheran. Are you telling him he doesn’t know what “high church Lutheranism” is?
Click to expand...
I’m telling him what he told me. That it is uncharitable to tell someone what they believe.
Imtrying said:
we only received instruction about church history and the trinity, a group within the church claimed the trinity was a collection of Indian nature spirits, who controlled the air, earth, and water.
Click to expand...
Can you prove that it isn’t true? Were you there?
All JonNC was doing was pointing out that this is not Lutheranism by any definition.
Click to expand...
I don’t care. There are plenty of Lutherans and former Lutherans on the web who have a different experience and understanding of Lutheranism than Jon.
I think most reasonable people who have any knowledge of Lutheranism would agree with him.
Click to expand...
Only people with a very limited contact with actual Lutherans would agree with Jon. I have met and spoken to possibly hundreds of Lutherans in my time on the Internet. And they mostly have a different understanding of Lutheranism than Jon.

Here’s one famous example. Marcus Grodi. A former Lutheran. See what Jon has to say about this example:
Before you object… page 30
By Marcus C. Grodi
In my own journey of faith, the Lord has brought me through a wide range of Christian traditions which each had a different view of the Lord’s Supper. I was baptized, catechized and confirmed a Lutheran, so was basically weaned on the Lutheran view of Consubstantiation.
Click to expand...
so was basically weaned on the Lutheran view of Consubstantiation.

See if Jon believes that Lutherans believe in consubstantiation.

Edit: Don’t bother. Here’s a quote:
JonNC said:
To say that Lutherans believe in consubstantiation is a falsehood, a calumny.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
De_Maria said:
I’m telling him what he told me. That it is uncharitable to tell someone what they believe.
Click to expand...
I don’t think he was being uncharitable at all. He didn’t tell Imtrying that he/she was wrong or a liar or that he/she simply misunderstood. He said those Lutherans who were teaching that the Trinity is a collection of Indian nature spirits were wrong, that the instruction given was wrong. He also said that (and he should know) “high church Lutherans” don’t believe that and sympathized with the bad catechesis Imtrying received.

Now, if you think that “high church Lutherans” do on the whole believe in trinitarian Indian nature spirits, then you’re more than welcome to educate us.
 
De_Maria said:
He claims its uncharitable for others to do so. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Click to expand...
JonNC didn’t tell Imtrying what he/she believed. Imtrying is now Catholic. Imtrying related experience of being a Lutheran in which it is clear to any reasonable person bad catechesis was involved. There was no instruction on the nature of communion and what was taught about the Trinity was not recognizably Christian. JohnNC simply remarked on how un-Lutheran it all was.

Even Imtrying indicates his/her experience might be unique. Shrug.
Imtrying said:
My experience might be unique, the ELCA was moving in unorthodox directions at that time.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
ltwin said:
40.png
De_Maria:
He claims its uncharitable for others to do so. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Click to expand...
JonNC didn’t tell Imtrying what he/she believed. Imtrying is now Catholic… JohnNC simply remarked on how un-Lutheran it all was.
Click to expand...
JonNC is no longer Lutheran, either. He’s Anglican. But when I told him that some Lutherans told me that they believed in consubstantiation, he, the Anglican, accused me of uncharitably telling him what he believed.

That’s not my logic, that’s his logic being applied to him.

But, what’s your opinion? Is it uncharitable for a Catholic to tell a former Lutheran turned Anglican that some Lutherans have told him that they believe in consubstantiation?

If so, please tell me why it isn’t uncharitable for an Anglican to tell a former Lutheran that his belief that he was a high Lutheran was wrong?
 
Why have you derailed what was an interesting and informative thread?
 
Fr. Mitch Pacwa summarizes the reformation as an attack on the Eucharist. A few still believe in their twist on the eucharist. Most denominations have jettisoned it altogether, replacing it with the bible, and “asking Jesus into your heart.” .
 
Indeed. That’s what Lutheran theologians and scholars have said for 450 years, that it is false.
And just like when non-Catholics claim Catholics worship Mary even when they’ve been told over and over it isn’t true, it is uncharitable to continue to claim they do.
Grodi is a smart guy, but he isn’t a Lutheran theologian. No Lutheran theologian I know of claims consubstantiation. If you know one, a scholar, a theologian, share the name and a link.
 
 
You’re trying to change the subject. The point is that you’re telling someone what they believe. You have deemed that uncharitable when someone else does it. But apparently, give yourself the license to do so.

Secondly, I’ve proven, several times, that Lutherans and former Lutherans, have different understandings of their own Lutheran experience than do you.

Case in point, Marcus Grodi, who grew up considering that the Lutheran view of the Eucharist was consubstantiation.
 
Martin Luther professed Consubstantiation and denied Transubstantiation.
 
De_Maria said:
You’re trying to change the subject. The point is that you’re telling someone what they believe. You have deemed that uncharitable when someone else does it. But apparently, give yourself the license to do so.

Secondly, I’ve proven, several times, that Lutherans and former Lutherans, have different understandings of their own Lutheran experience than do you.

Case in point, Marcus Grodi, who grew up considering that the Lutheran view of the Eucharist was consubstantiation.
Click to expand...
I can point to Catholics who have differing views of females in the priesthood. It doesn’t make them right. If I insisted, because of this group, over and over again that Catholics vbelieve in females in the priesthood, regardless of correction be Catholic leaders in their words, yes it would be uncharitable.
The FACT is that Lutheran theologians have denied consubstantiation for almost 500 years, from Luther to Gerhard, Sasse to Krauth.
FACT: Consubstantiation is now and always has been rejected by Lutheranism.

Jon
 
“Real Presence Communion – Consubstantiation?”. WELS Topical Q&A. Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod. Archived from the original on 2 January 2008. Retrieved 26 Jan 2015. Although some Lutherans have used the term ‘consbstantiation’ [sic] and it might possibly be understood correctly (e.g., the bread & wine, body & blood coexist with each other in the Lord’s Supper), most Lutherans reject the term because of the false connotation it contains…either that the body and blood, bread and wine come together to form one substance in the Lord’s Supper or that the body and blood are present in a natural manner like the bread and the wine. Lutherans believe that the bread and the wine are present in a natural manner in the Lord’s Supper and Christ’s true body and blood are present in an illocal, supernatural manner.


References section
 
k5thbeatle said:
I hope someone can help me but I am looking for a little insight as to exactly what Lutherans (and other protestant religions I suppose) exactly believe in regards to their communion/Eucharist service? And I guess as a follow up what is the truth regarding this?

Thanks
Click to expand...
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...l-conflitto-alla-comunione_en.html#Eucharist_

Also from my studies I think this shows the differences:
  • Real Presence and the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist (Catholic and Orthodox).
  • Christ’s body and blood are present - "This is my body” is taken literally. (Lutheran).
  • Christ is not present literally in the elements, but he is spiritually present. Sacraments are signs not mere symbols. (Calvin)
  • Deny any form of physical or spiritual presence of Christ in the bread and wine (Ulrich Zwingli Memorialism) - sacramental signs are merely symbols.
 
Last edited:
De_Maria said:
“Real Presence Communion – Consubstantiation?”. WELS Topical Q&A. Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod. Archived from the original on 2 January 2008. Retrieved 26 Jan 2015. Although some Lutherans have used the term ‘consbstantiation’ [sic] and it might possibly be understood correctly (e.g., the bread & wine, body & blood coexist with each other in the Lord’s Supper),**most Lutherans reject the term because of the false connotation it contains…**either that the body and blood, bread and wine come together to form one substance in the Lord’s Supper or that the body and blood are present in a natural manner like the bread and the wine. Lutherans believe that the bread and the wine are present in a natural manner in the Lord’s Supper and Christ’s true body and blood are present in an illocal, supernatural manner.
Consubstantiation - Wikipedia
References section
Click to expand...
Let me know when you are ready for Wikipedia to be the definer of Catholic belief.
I still won’t use it, but that way Catholics here will know.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top