G
Guyonthestreet
Guest
I’m interested in exploring Catholicism for one reason only, the Eucharist. Can someone tell me what other faiths believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist? Thanks.
What Churchs believe in the Real Presence besides the Catholic Church?
- Status
L
LDNCatholic
Guest
The Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, some Lutheran Churches, some individual Anglicans.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
The Orthodox, certainly.
The only problem with some Anglican and some Lutheran churches is that while they do believe in some type of “Real Presence”, they lack valid orders and thus cannot actually consecrate the Eucharist.
The only problem with some Anglican and some Lutheran churches is that while they do believe in some type of “Real Presence”, they lack valid orders and thus cannot actually consecrate the Eucharist.
G
GKC
Guest
This is quite in keeping with Apostolicae Curae, and should be affirmed by all RCs.
Anglicans have a different view of the matter (and the form and the intent, so to speak).
GKC
*Anglicanus Catholicus *
All Lutheran Churches do, to my knowledge, as it is in the Augsburg Confession.
This is the proper position that any Catholic should take about the Lutheran Eucharist. Obviously, we believe that prebyter ordination, while not preferable to apostolic succession, is valid, particularly since it has been used in the past by Rome.
Please see my signature.
Jon
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
You know we’ll have to agree to disagree on this, Jon. . .but for the record, no one will be happier when we are in full union again than I. (My maternal grandmother was a Lutheran). I believe that I’m expressing the Catholic position as a Catholic; I have no doubt that you are expressing a perfectly correct position according to the Augsberg Confession.
R
Roy5
Guest
ALL CHRISTIANS I KNOW BELIEVE…
Code:
All Christians I know believe in the 'real presence' of Christ in Holy Communion. They don't believe in transubstantiation. Obviously Christ is present every time we gather to worship Him - indeed He specifically promised that He would be with us always.
One difference between Roman Catholics and Protestants is that most Protestants (all?) reject the idea that the words of consecration offered by the priest changes the bread and wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus. This simply seems too pagan for most Protestants. True, Jesus said this is my body and this is my blood. But he used many such analogies. "I am the door" "I am the Good Shepherd" etc. Protestants vary somewhat among themselves - Lutherans, as I recall, accept what they call consubtantiation.
The whole idea of offering up the body and blood of Jesus again and again and again at masses, and consuming them into our bodies, seems too remniscent of early mystery cults, some of which taught that if we consume the body and blood of a god we benefit from some of its strengths and inherit some of its sanctity.
I suggest that this is a stumbling block for millions of Catholics. I recall seeing a poll that indicated that the majority of American Catholics today don't believe in transubstantiation. In the medieval age - when people believed in witches, socery, all sorts of miracles, omens, etc. - such belief was easy to accept. This is no longer so.
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
Guyonthestreet, just read from your bible and listen to the words of our lord read luke 22-19-20
matt 26-27
and mark 14-22-24 and just believe the words of our lord its all there,
It was God Himself, Our Lord, Jesus Christ, who warns us at the ‘Sermon on the Mount’ - “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly are ravening wolves.” (Matt. 7:15)
matt 26-27
and mark 14-22-24 and just believe the words of our lord its all there,
It was God Himself, Our Lord, Jesus Christ, who warns us at the ‘Sermon on the Mount’ - “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly are ravening wolves.” (Matt. 7:15)
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
Yep, I think that’s the case. And the nice thing is we are agreeing to disagree quite agreeably. BTW, as a Catholic, what’s your take on Cr. Ratzinger’s quote?
Jon
Gabriel of 12;4728648:
We use wine, like Christ did.And it becomes the Body and blood of Christ, like He said it would.
EDIT: And btw, Bill, I take umbrage when some protestants call Catholics “cracker worshippers”. I feel your comment is just as uncharitible.
Jon
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
Some Thing Must Be Wrong I Never Said Cathloic And Crakers
R
Roy5
Guest
CRACKERS AND GRAPEJUICE?
Code:
Okay - no need to treat fellow Christians rudely.
Protestants actually differ. Episcopalians and Lutherans usually offer wine to communicants. Baptists, Methodists, and other 'low church' Protestants use grapejuice.
Why? They want alcoholics to participate without anxiety. Since Protestants offer communicants both the bread and the cup, and since most congregations have at least some alcoholics, they want to make it comfortable for alcoholics to receive. In some instances, even a little alcohol could send a few alcoholics on a binge.
Remember, also, that some of these denominations - Baptists and Methodists, for example - have long traditions of total temperance. While this idea may not be as strong today, the idea still persists that it's wisest to avoid alcohol altogether. That's a sure way of escaping alcoholism. And even though alcohol is treated lightly in today's society, it is a drug that contributes heavily to traffic deaths, spousal abuse and other crimes, failed marriages, poverty, and other social blights.
Now, while a few Protestant churches use matzos (crackers) as bread - unleavened - most use regular bread off the store shelves or even the same wafers (easy to keep and store) that are used to Catholic churches.
Again, all Protestants believe in the 'real presence' of Christ in that he is present in all worship settings (Matt. 28:20) and everywhere else. The difference is that they reject the teaching that a prayer of consecration by a priest changes bread and wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus. That may have been a comfortable doctrine centuries ago, when most people were ready to accept a whole variety of superstitions, but for most Protestants (and millions of Catholics - believe me) in our modern world it simply is unbelievable. Sorry, and I don't mean to offend anyone, but what I say here is true. But for those who can believe it, I respect you as much as I can't agree with you.
A
Always_For_Him
Guest
Hi Guy,
I have been reading a thread on this very subject that went over the 1,000 post mark this morning and was just closed. BUT, it is a fantastic thread. I am a gluton for punishment, I started at the beginning and can’t stop reading it. Sometimes, someone from threads that are that dynamic will start a #2, so look for it. I think Bill Pick might have. Anyway, I thought you would enjoy the read. There is some VERY knowledgable information on that thread. Have a great day. Here is the link, I hope it works:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=296935
S
spoiltvictorian
Guest
Better to teach alcoholics they will be helped, not harmed, by the wine in Communion. Christ gave us Communion to help us, and since He is sinless He would not cause a brother to stumble. What’s dangerous is to abolish wine, which Christ used, from church. Sacramental usage of wine balances out the other uses in a person’s life.
Edit: Also, you’re right that the Real Presence makes some people, including Catholics, uncomfortable today. But who said Truth should be comfortable?
R
Robbinson
Guest
Hi Roy - I’m not Catholic, but I believe in the “real presence”. But I"m most interested in the language I underligned in your post. Its interesting to me as, if you are Christian, I assume you believe in the incarnation (God becoming man in Christ)? If so, isn’t this more difficult to believe than that God can turn wine into his blood and bread into his body? How about Jesus miracle of turning water into wine? Do you believe he actually did that miracle, or do you believe it is only a story/metephor? If only a story or metephor, which miracles, if any, do you believe from the scriptures? Do you see the point?
To me - I believe in Jesus and the power of his words. He was vividly clear in John 6:30-66 that this would literally be his blood and body - so clear, that when questioned by his disciples, he repeated the claim (in even stronger language, if you read the greek) and then allowed his disciples to leave him (and walk away from eternal life) over this inability or unwillingness to believe this. Then he offered the apostles the ability to walk away to - and they declined saying, you have the words of “eternal life” (what words? just a few verses earlier, the claim that the bread and wine become his flesh and bood are described as leading to “eternal life”).
If that is not enough, Paul supports this teaching in corinthians when he warns that we drink in judgement if we partake of the eucharist without “discerning the body” and also elsewhere in corinthians when he says, is not the eucharist a “participation in the blood of Christ”.
Something to think about any way.
Blessings,
Brian
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Beautifully put Robbinson; you are almost there, now all you have to do is confirm that the Eucharist is “Valid” according to the Apostles and “APOSTOLIC TRADTION”, by Valid words of Consecration and Valid holy orders to present these gifts before almighty God. Without these you may not have a valid Eucharist, just bread and wine recalling the past. The true Eucharist is the Eternal sacrifice being offered presently in eternity. This is why Jesus the Lamb of God is standing not sitting as though slain offering himself eternally for all ages once and for all.
Peace on your journey, God be with you
- Status