Transubstantiation

[Ben_Berriochoa]

Recent discussion with a lutheran friend led the following questions for which I could not offer facts his question.

Lutheran’s believe that the eucharist is the Body and blood of christ. How does one explain that their belief is not the same as ours? they replied that this is not just for catholics.

Can I ask a second questiion?

Where did we get the name Catholics and who gave that name?

God Bless,

Ben

 

[sanctus_belle]

Lutherans believe that the substance of Christ joins with the substance of the bread. Catholics believe that the substance of Jesus replaces the substance of the bread, though the physical accidents remain.

Found this on the subject: net-abbey.org/luthcomm.htm

I’m pretty sure that the name “Catholic” comes from when Ignatius of Antioch used that term to describe the Church in the 300’s AD. Someone will probably give you a more informative answer soon though.

 

[ProVobis]

Lutherans believe that the substance of Christ joins with the substance of the bread. Catholics believe that the substance of Jesus replaces the substance of the bread, though the physical accidents remain.

Found this on the subject: net-abbey.org/luthcomm.htm

I’m pretty sure that the name “Catholic” comes from when Ignatius of Antioch used that term to describe the Church in the 300’s AD. Someone will probably give you a more informative answer soon though.

Consubstantiation vs transubstantiation

 

[bpbasilphx]

I’m pretty sure that the name “Catholic” comes from when Ignatius of Antioch used that term to describe the Church in the 300’s AD.

St. Ignatius of Antioch lived from 25-110 and knew the Apostles personally.

In fact, he was the child Jesus put in His lap when he said, “Suffer the little children to come unto Me…”

 

[Rolltide]

The word “catholic” is a synonym for the word “universal”. It was originally developed to refer to the “universal” church, since we were all just one denomination back then (more or less). Ignatius was indeed the first to coin the phrase, around 110 AD.

 

[thistle]

I’m pretty sure that the name “Catholic” comes from when Ignatius of Antioch used that term to describe the Church in the 300’s AD.

St. Ignatius of Antioch lived from 25-110 and knew the Apostles personally.

In fact, he was the child Jesus put in His lap when he said, “Suffer the little children to come unto Me…”

Actually Catholic is scriptural.

The name “the Catholic Church” (Greek: katholikos ekklesia) developed from Acts 9:31 “the Church throughout all” (Greek: ekklesia kath olos).

 

[japhy]

Actually Catholic is scriptural. The name “the Catholic Church” (Greek: katholikos ekklesia) developed from Acts 9:31 “the Church throughout all” (Greek: ekklesia kath olos).

I came here to say that. Instead, I will merely say: QFT

 

[sanctus_belle]

I’m pretty sure that the name “Catholic” comes from when Ignatius of Antioch used that term to describe the Church in the 300’s AD.

St. Ignatius of Antioch lived from 25-110 and knew the Apostles personally.

In fact, he was the child Jesus put in His lap when he said, “Suffer the little children to come unto Me…”

You learn something new every day.

 

[Seatuck]

I’m pretty sure that the name “Catholic” comes from when Ignatius of Antioch used that term to describe the Church in the 300’s AD.

St. Ignatius of Antioch lived from 25-110 and knew the Apostles personally.

In fact, he was the child Jesus put in His lap when he said, “Suffer the little children to come unto Me…”

Fact or Pius Tradition?

With regard to Lutherans . They certainly don’t keep Jesus in a tabernacle. They will throw out any left over bread. That’s a bit of a clue that the belief is not the same.

 

[tassitus]

With regard to Lutherans . They certainly don’t keep Jesus in a tabernacle. They will throw out any left over bread. That’s a bit of a clue that the belief is not the same.

Seatuck, are you a Lutheran/former Lutheran? If not, can we get one online here to confirm this? If so, that would certainly seem to provide sure finality to the question.

 

[Nita]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seatuck
With regard to Lutherans . They certainly don’t keep Jesus in a tabernacle. They will throw out any left over bread. That’s a bit of a clue that the belief is not the same.

I’m not Lutheran, but Seatuck is correct in that Lutherans do not reserve the leftover bread, recognizing it as the Body and Blood or Our Lord. My understanding is that they do not believe the bread is “consubstantiated” until it is consumed. Therefore, any unconsumed bread is still only bread.

Nita

 

[toaslan]

Despite any Lutheran belief in “consubstantiation,” let me note that nothing actually happens to their bread and wine; Lutherans achieve neither transubstantiation nor consubstantiation, no matter how proper the matter they may pray over nor how correct the words of consecration they use. The bread remains but bread.

That’s because they have no priests–not the real kind, the kind who receive, handed down to them through the unbroken Apostolic Succession from Christ Himself, the duty and the power to confect the Eucharist.

apologies if this is wasting time on the obvious…

 

[angelusm]

Lutherans, and all other protestants, have no Eucharist. They have just bread and wine. Transsubstantiation cannot happen in protestant denominations because thay have no priesthood.
God bless

 

[Newbie2]

Lutherans, and all other protestants, have no Eucharist. They have just bread and wine. Transsubstantiation cannot happen in protestant denominations because thay have no priesthood.
God bless

It’s called the “Sacrament of the Altar”. Whether or not there are priests or not in the (Lutheran church, specifically) is a rather moot point, since they don’t believe in transubstantiation.

Their belief, as has been noted, is that they receive the Lord Jesus along with the bread and wine. Very unbiblical if one recalls the Lord’s own words.

The answer to the OP’s question, then, is that is both sacraments the Body and Blood of Christ is present, but not in exactly the same manner.

In my (former) Lutheran church, the wafers that were not used were used at future communion services, the care and reverence of which were not an issue since the belief is that they were not transubstantiated.

 

[JonNC]

Catholic/Lutheran dialgue on this subject remains ongoing, but here is one joint statement, from which I have quoted a segment.

prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/l-rc/doc/e_l-rc_eucharist.html

The ecumenical discussion has shown that these two positions must no longer be regarded as opposed in a way that leads to separation. The Lutheran tradition agrees with the Catholic tradition that the consecrated elements do not simply remain bread and wine but by the power of the creative Word are bestowed as the body and blood of Christ. In this sense it also could occasionally speak, as does the Greek tradition of a “change”.36 The concept of transsubstantiation for its part is intended as a confession and preservation of the mystery character of the Eucharistic presence; it is not intended as an explanation of how this change occurs37 (see the appendices on “Real Presence” and “Christ’s Presence in the Eucharist”).

Differences related to the duration of the eucharistic presence appear also in liturgical practice. **Catholic and Lutheran Christians together confess that the eucharistic presence of the Lord Jesus Christ is directed towards believing reception, that it nevertheless is not confined only to the moment of reception, and that it does not depend on the faith of the receiver however closely related to this it might be. **
According to Catholic doctrine the Lord grants His presence even beyond the sacramental celebration for as long as the species of bread and wine remain. The faithful are accordingly invited to “give to this holy sacrament in veneration the worship of latria, which is due to the true God”.38

Lutherans have not infrequently taken exception to certain of the forms of eucharistic piety connected with this conviction. They are regarded as inadmissibly separated from the eucharistic meal. On the other hand, Catholic sensibilities are offended by the casual way in which the elements remaining after communion are treated sometimes on the Lutheran side, and this indicates a discrepancy which is not yet overcome (cf. appendix The Presence of Christ in the Eucharist 2).

In order to remedy this situation, it would be good “for Catholics to remember, particularly in catechism and preaching, that the original intention in preserving the eucharistic gifts was to distribute them to the sick and those not present”, and for the Lutherans “the best means should be adopted of showing respect due to the elements that have served for the celebration of the Eucharist, which is to consume them subsequently, without precluding their use for communion of the sick”.39 Regarding eucharistic adoration, Catholics should take care that their practice does not contradict the common conviction of the meal character of the Eucharist. They should also be aware of the fact that in the Orthodox Churches, for example, there exist other forms of Eucharistic piety without Eucharistic faith being questioned for this reason. Lutherans for their part should consider “that adoration of the reserved sacrament” not only “has been very much a part of Catholic life and a meaningful form of devotion to Catholics for many centuries”,40 but that also for them “as long as Christ remains sacramentally present, worship, reverence and adoration are appropriate”.41

Jon

 

[JonNC]

I’m not Lutheran, but Seatuck is correct in that Lutherans do not reserve the leftover bread, recognizing it as the Body and Blood or Our Lord. My understanding is that they do not believe the bread is “consubstantiated” until it is consumed. Therefore, any unconsumed bread is still only bread.

Nita

This is incorrect. Lutherans believe that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ at the words of institution. Christ did not say, “Take it, this will become my body when you eat it”. Receptionism is an error that no Lutheran should hold.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Fact or Pius Tradition?

With regard to Lutherans . They certainly don’t keep Jesus in a tabernacle. They will throw out any left over bread. That’s a bit of a clue that the belief is not the same.

My father, a Lutheran minister, never threw the host away after consecration. He reserved it and used it for communing sick and shut-ins and the like.

Jon

 

[japhy]

Catholic/Lutheran dialgue on this subject: “Regarding eucharistic adoration, Catholics should take care that their practice does not contradict the common conviction of the meal character of the Eucharist.”

“Common convinctions” aside, Adoration of the Most Blessed Sacrament does not contradict either the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist nor its nature as a mystical banquet. Rather, it supplements both these natures by rendering unto the Real Presence of Jesus in the Most Blessed Sacrament the worship due to him.

 

[JonNC]

“Common convinctions” aside, Adoration of the Most Blessed Sacrament does not contradict either the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist nor its nature as a mystical banquet. Rather, it supplements both these natures by rendering unto the Real Presence of Jesus in the Most Blessed Sacrament the worship due to him.

I have no problem with that at all. I, personally, have no issue with adoration. If the sacrament has been reserved, reverence and adoration is quite appropriate.

Jon

 

[Newbie2]

This is incorrect. Lutherans believe that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ at the words of institution. Christ did not say, “Take it, this will become my body when you eat it”. Receptionism is an error that no Lutheran should hold.

Jon

From the LCMS site:

“In view of these (scripture) passages as well as the words of Jesus when He instituted the sacrament, we have concluded that while we eat bread and drink wine in the sacrament we–in, with, and under these forms–receive the body and blood of our Lord. How? That is the mystery.”