Is the "Real Presence" [catholic Holy Communion" Really REAL?

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
One of the underpinnings of Catholic is belief lies in Christ Real Presence in Catholic Holy Communion... not merely a sign,not a reminder, BUT Jesus Christ personally is present.

Do you or do you nor accept this position?

Why

or Why NOT?

God Blss you,
Patrick

This isn't a "denomination specific" topic, however.

In addition to Roman Catholics, the Real Presence is also officially the belief of Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Old Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, and the Reformed and Presbyterian churches. That's a majority of the world's Christians. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mrs MKS
Upvote 0

Tigger45

Romans 12:2…be transformed…
Supporter
Aug 24, 2012
20,713
13,149
E. Eden
✟1,264,086.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
This isn't a "denomination specific" topic, however.

In addition to Roman Catholics, the Real Presence is also officially the belief of Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Old Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, and the Reformed and Presbyterian churches. That's a majority of the world's Christians. :)
That's true. Maybe the OP meant transubstantiation.
 
Upvote 0
F

Fullness Found

Guest
This isn't a "denomination specific" topic, however.

In addition to Roman Catholics, the Real Presence is also officially the belief of Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Old Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, and the Reformed and Presbyterian churches. That's a majority of the world's Christians. :)

Am I wrong in asserting that the methodist and reformed/presbyterians believe in a real 'spiritual presence,' not 'body, blood, soul, and divinity' as Catholics beleive? I ask because I have never attended methodist or presbyterian Churches that gave me any inkling that they had any special beliefs about communion whatsoever except for maybe the 'symbolism only/spiritual communion' view (but maybe its just that area I am in). Luther himself is often quoted as saying, 'I would rather have the body and blood with the pope than the bread and wine with the enthusiasts." Do Anglicans believe in 'body, blood, soul, and divinity' or a different understanding?
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Mrs MKS
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,339
26,779
Pacific Northwest
✟728,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Am I wrong in asserting that the methodist and reformed/presbyterians believe in a real 'spiritual presence,' not 'body, blood, soul, and divinity' as Catholics beleive? I ask because I have never attended methodist or presbyterian Churches that gave me any inkling that they had any special beliefs about communion whatsoever except for maybe the 'symbolism only/spiritual communion' view (but maybe its just that area I am in). Luther himself is often quoted as saying, 'I would rather have the body and blood with the pope than the bread and wine with the enthusiasts." Do Anglicans believe in 'body, blood, soul, and divinity' or a different understanding?

Methodism has some more explicit teaching on the Real Presence than the Reformed Tradition does; though that is complicated in that the Reformed Tradition is informed by both Calvin (who believed in a type of Real Presence that was more spiritual in nature) and Zwingli (who is the father of Memorlalism). For example (concerning Methodism) the UMC has come out and rather explicitly stated that Christ is indeed truly present in the bread and wine of Communion, and has done so on the basis that this is part of the historic Wesleyan Tradition, found in John Wesley's writings and sermons and in his brother Charles' hymns. Though they have argued that as it is a Mystery, the exacts can't be known, but rather are to be received in faith.

UMC article here.

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Informative
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Am I wrong in asserting that the methodist and reformed/presbyterians believe in a real 'spiritual presence,' not 'body, blood, soul, and divinity' as Catholics beleive?
It probably is correct to describe both as holding to a spiritual Real Presence, although they are not identical definitions. But it's definitely a belief in the Real Presence.

I ask because I have never attended methodist or presbyterian Churches that gave me any inkling that they had any special beliefs about communion whatsoever except for maybe the 'symbolism only/spiritual communion' view (but maybe its just that area I am in).
Well, it can't be both at once. Either a persone believes in the Real Presence or else he believes in the Memorialist/Representational view of the sacrament.

Luther himself is often quoted as saying, 'I would rather have the body and blood with the pope than the bread and wine with the enthusiasts." Do Anglicans believe in 'body, blood, soul, and divinity' or a different understanding?
The official Anglican belief is that the elements are the real body and blood of Christ in a heavenly and spiritual sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawkiz
Upvote 0
F

Fullness Found

Guest
Thanks ViaCrucis.
That was very helpful. I read the whole article. It seemed to be intentionally vague to me... very postmodern. Maybe this is because they are trying to preserve the fact that it is a 'mystery.' Either way, one part stuck out to me:

"We do not embrace the medieval doctrine of transubstantiation, though we do believe that the elements are essential tangible means through which God works. We understand the divine presence in temporal and relational terms. In the Holy Meal of the church, the past, present, and future of the living Christ come together by the power of the Holy Spirit so that we may receive and embody Jesus Christ as God’s saving gift for the whole world."
-United Methodist Church Website

I guess they are not too sure of what it is, but they are sure that no 'transubstantiation' takes place. That seems to leave two possibilities: It is either Christ's spirit within normal bread & wine, or it is Christ's spirit within a physical mixture of his flesh and bread, & his blood and wine. But then again, the statement 'we understand the divine presence in temporal and relational terms...' makes the water even muddier, at least for me.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,339
26,779
Pacific Northwest
✟728,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Thanks ViaCrucis.
That was very helpful. I read the whole article. It seemed to be intentionally vague to me... very postmodern. Maybe this is because they are trying to preserve the fact that it is a 'mystery.' Either way, one part stuck out to me:

"We do not embrace the medieval doctrine of transubstantiation, though we do believe that the elements are essential tangible means through which God works. We understand the divine presence in temporal and relational terms. In the Holy Meal of the church, the past, present, and future of the living Christ come together by the power of the Holy Spirit so that we may receive and embody Jesus Christ as God’s saving gift for the whole world."
-United Methodist Church Website

I guess they are not too sure of what it is, but they are sure that no 'transubstantiation' takes place. That seems to leave two possibilities: It is either Christ's spirit within normal bread & wine, or it is Christ's spirit within a physical mixture of his flesh and bread, & his blood and wine. But then again, the statement 'we understand the divine presence in temporal and relational terms...' makes the water even muddier, at least for me.

We Lutherans likewise deny Transubstantiation, but our Confessions explicitly state that the bread and wine of the Eucharist is the very true and real body and blood of Christ. It is a Mystery, unfathomable and incomprehensible, but it is nevertheless true. Jesus said, "This is My body" and "This is My blood". Hoc est, this is. Everything else is commentary.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0
F

Fullness Found

Guest
We Lutherans likewise deny Transubstantiation, but our Confessions explicitly state that the bread and wine of the Eucharist is the very true and real body and blood of Christ. It is a Mystery, unfathomable and incomprehensible, but it is nevertheless true. Jesus said, "This is My body" and "This is My blood". Hoc est, this is. Everything else is commentary.

-CryptoLutheran


I see. For me, believing in transubstatiation does not diminish the unfathomable and incomprehensible aspects of this Holy mystery, just clarifies that Christ's glorified 'body, blood, soul, and divinity' is really there before me under the appearance of bread and wine, that and nothing else (no mixture of Christ's true flesh with normal bread), though my senses tell me otherwise. Is a Lutheran free to believe this if they choose (even though the term 'transubstantiation' is rejected), or must a Lutheran believe that there is a mixture taking place in the blessed sacrament?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,339
26,779
Pacific Northwest
✟728,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
I see. For me, believing in transubstatiation does not diminish the unfathomable and incomprehensible aspects of this Holy mystery, just clarifies that Christ's glorified 'body, blood, soul, and divinity' is really there before me under the appearance of bread and wine, that and nothing else (no mixture of Christ's true flesh with normal bread), though my senses tell me otherwise. Is a Lutheran free to believe this if they choose (even though the term 'transubstantiation' is rejected), or must a Lutheran believe that there is a mixture taking place in the blessed sacrament?

There is no "official" Lutheran view apart from that it is really and truly Christ's body and blood. The typical view put forward, originally by Luther himself, is what's known as the "Sacramental Union", which isn't so much an explanation as it is an analogy. The analogy is to the Hypostatic Union; in the same way our Lord Jesus Christ is both wholly God and wholly man without confusion and without separation, so is the Supper both ordinary bread and wine as well as the true body and blood of Christ.

There's no mixture taking place. It simply is what it is. I don't see any reason why a Lutheran absolutely cannot believe Transubstantiation or something like it, or also Consubstantiation; but the Lutheran view is simply that they are what they are.

"Now, what is the Sacrament of the Altar?

Answer: It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, in and under the bread and wine which we Christians are commanded by the Word of Christ to eat and to drink. And as we have said of Baptism that it is not simple water, so here also we say the Sacrament is bread and wine, but not mere bread and wine, such as are ordinarily served at the table, but bread and wine comprehended in, and connected with, the Word of God.
" - The Large Catechism, The Sacrament of the Altar

"Article X: Of the Lord's Supper.

Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and reject those that teach otherwise.
" - The Augsburg Confession, Article X

"Affirmative Theses.
Confession of the Pure Doctrine concerning the Holy Supper against the Sacramentarians.

1. We believe, teach, and confess that in the Holy Supper the body and blood of Christ are truly and essentially present, and are truly distributed and received with the bread and the wine.

2. We believe, teach, and confess that the words of the testament of Christ are not to be understood otherwise than as they read, according to the letter, so that the bread does not signify the absent body and the wine the absent blood of Christ, but that, on account of the sacramental union, they [the bread and wine] are truly the body and blood of Christ.

3. Now, as the consecreation, we believe, teach and confess that no work of man or recitation of the minister [of the church] produces this presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Holy Supper, but that this is to be ascribed only and alone to the almighty power of our Lord Jesus Christ.

4. But at the same time we also believe, teach, and confess unanimously that in the use of the Holy Supper the words of the insitution of Christ should in no way be omitted, but should be publicly recited, as it is written 1 Cor. 10:16: The cup of blessing which we bless, etc. This blessing occurs through the recitation of the words of Christ.

5. The grounds, however, on which we stand against the Sacramentarians in this matter are those which Dr. Luther has laid down in his Large Confession concerning the Lord's Supper.

...

6. We believe, teach, and confess that the body and blood of Christ are received with the bread and wine, not only spiritually by faith, but also orally; yet not in a Capernaitic, but in a supernatural, heavenly mode, because of the sacramental union; as the words of Christ clearly show, when Christ gave direction to take, eat, and drink as was also done by the apostles; for it is written Mark 14:23: And they all drank of it. St. Paul likewise says, 1 Cor. 10:16: The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? that is: He who eats this bread eats the body of Christ, which also the chief ancient teachers of the Church, Chrysostom, Cyprian, Leo I, Gregory, Ambrose, Augustine, unanimously testify.
" Epitome of the Formula of Concord, VII. The Lord's Supper

And so on and so forth.

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawkiz
Upvote 0

football5680

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2013
4,138
1,516
Georgia
✟90,322.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Yes I accept it. The Earliest Christians accepted the Literal presence and they were much closer in time to the apostles who preached this message. If they believed in the literal presence then this was something the apostles taught to them. Jesus left the apostles to spread his message and I cannot say I know more than them or more than the first couple of generation of the people who were taught by them.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Excuse me for saying this again, but this question is not "denomination-specific," although that's the purpose of this particular forum. A majority of Christians of many different denominations believe in the Real Presence.

HOWEVER, if the OP meant to ask about TRANSUBSTANTIATION rather than Real Presence, we've got a denomination-specific issue. I guess I[m asking that we consider that to be our topic from here on.
 
Upvote 0
F

Fullness Found

Guest
Excuse me for saying this again, but this question is not "denomination-specific," although that's the purpose of this particular forum. A majority of Christians of many different denominations believe in the Real Presence.

I think the OP shows that he is referring to 'Real presence' in a Catholic sense. As you know, the Catholic understanding is not like that of denominations that believe Jesus' spirit inhabits normal bread, or our minds are lifted up to partake of true heavenly realities through faith when we eat the normal bread. Being omnipresent, God is always everywhere, but when Catholics say 'real presence' of Christ, we are talking about the glorified body, blood, soul, and divinity of our incarnate savior. Sames words, different meanings.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I though he already said that he is refering to 'Real presence' in the Catholic sense.

Yes. I just wanted to clarify that and have us all be on the same page with it because there is so often confusion when we come to using certain terms and dealing with the often fine distinctions between the churches on this matter.

As you know, the Catholic understanding is not like other denominations that believe Jesus' spirit enters into normal bread, or our minds are lifted up to heavenly realities when we eat the normal bread. To a Catholic, these other definitions are not the 'real presence' as far as I am aware...

That says it very well. I'd suggest, however, that we talk about Transubstantiation by name when we address that belief rather than get into "it's not really Real Presence unless you believe this way about it....? :)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

UK Mike

Benedictine and part-time Quaker
Jun 9, 2009
48
3
✟7,683.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Hi PJM,

To me Christ really is present to us and with us in the Eucharist. I don't see that presence in philosophical ways (transubstantiation, consubstantiation, etc.). For me it is perhaps a little more like the disciples on the road to Emmeus - Christ's presence takes on a clearer focus in the breaking of the bread. I do rather wish people hadn't had tried to describe it as a philosophical construct - that just seems to have caused division without, in my opinion, adding to the significance of the Eucharist.

God bless +

Michael
 
Upvote 0

MarkRohfrietsch

Unapologetic Apologist
Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
30,381
5,250
✟816,630.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
One of the underpinnings of Catholic is belief lies in Christ Real Presence in Catholic Holy Communion... not merely a sign,not a reminder, BUT Jesus Christ personally is present.

Do you or do you nor accept this position?

Why

or Why NOT?

God Blss you,
Patrick

Yes, I do; because Scripture, the ECFs and orthodox theology has always taught and believed such.:)



Hi PJM,

To me Christ really is present to us and with us in the Eucharist. I don't see that presence in philosophical ways (transubstantiation, consubstantiation, etc.). For me it is perhaps a little more like the disciples on the road to Emmeus - Christ's presence takes on a clearer focus in the breaking of the bread. I do rather wish people hadn't had tried to describe it as a philosophical construct - that just seems to have caused division without, in my opinion, adding to the significance of the Eucharist.

God bless +

Michael

Michael, you sound Lutheran!;)
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Michael, you sound Lutheran!;)

A thought occurs to me as I read that. I have read here several times lately the Lutheran view of the Sacrament described by Lutherans as "Jesus said...so we believe (without unnecessary definition)" Now you are saying that when a Catholic says something along those lines, he "sounds Lutheran." Wouldn't it rather be that you all sound Anglican?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

AvilaSurfer

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 14, 2015
9,736
4,784
NO
✟928,096.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The Consecrated Host and Wine, through transubstatiation, is the actual body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ. Jesus spoke in parables about many things. At the Last Supper, there was no parable. He said "This is my body. This is my blood." No symbolism. If you don't believe that, fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawkiz
Upvote 0