Eucharist

[FaithT]

Do Catholics believe that only a Catholic priest can change the bread and wine into the Eucharist? Or can the Holy Spirit do this through an LCMS pastor?

 

[Gnarwhal]

Do Catholics believe that only a Catholic priest can change the bread and wine into the Eucharist? Or can the Holy Spirit do this through an LCMS pastor?

Catholic and Orthodox priests and bishops are the only ones who have valid faculties to consecrate the gifts into the body and blood of Christ.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Do Catholics believe that only a Catholic priest can change the bread and wine into the Eucharist? Or can the Holy Spirit do this through an LCMS pastor?

Catholic, Coptic - Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox.
That's it.

 

[RileyG]

Do Catholics believe that only a Catholic priest can change the bread and wine into the Eucharist? Or can the Holy Spirit do this through an LCMS pastor?

Nope!

LCMS does not have valid sacraments other than Baptism and marriage (as long as a Catholic wasn't being married outside the Church).

 

[RileyG]

Catholic, Coptic - Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox.
That's it.

As well as the Polish National Catholic Church, the Assyrian Church of the East, and **some** Old Catholic bishops and priests.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Do Catholics believe that only a Catholic priest can change the bread and wine into the Eucharist? Or can the Holy Spirit do this through an LCMS pastor?

This is really an ordination question. First, does the LCMS intend to ordain as the Catholics and Orthodox ordain? Have they intended that all along, or have they intended something else? Second, do they have validly ordained bishops to ordain their priests? Or have they broken that succession of bishops?

If both could be answered in the affirmative, intent and succession, then maybe. For the most part I suspect there would be gaps there. Some parts of Lutheranism maintained bishops. Some parts of Lutheranism may have maintained intent. Do those two things intersect?

I would refer you to the old Lutheran-Catholic Dialogue documents from the 1970's and 1980's to see how they addressed these issues. But generally I think unless there are both intent and episcopal continuity the answer would be 'no'. Wishing it were otherwise but I don't think so.

With regard to Anglican ordination the general answer is also 'no'. But there are pockets of places where the intent of ordination might be the same (Anglo-Catholics) and where efforts have been made to re-acquire a lineage of validly ordained bishops. If an Anglican priest wishes to become a Catholic priest he is ordained again BUT he is allowed to be ordained as a married man. This means there is some recognition that the prior Anglican ordination was not nothing.

 

[RileyG]

None of the Lutheran bishops are ordained validly. Therefore, there is no Eucharist in the Lutheran Church, according to RC teaching.

 

[chevyontheriver]

None of the Lutheran bishops are ordained validly. Therefore, there is no Eucharist in the Lutheran Church, according to RC teaching.

Probably. However there have been attempts by Anglicans (and some Lutherans) to re-acquire apostolic succession through ordination of bishops by other validly ordained but irregular bishops. This is sometimes by Polish National Catholic bishops or Old Catholic bishops or by odd Orthodox bishops. The state of some of these episcopal ordinations will need to be carefully re-examined as it is different than even a generation ago. We used to say I think rightly that Anglican ordinations were all null and void. But the situation has changed. Some may only be irregular but valid. It’s messier now. And to the extent Lutherans have done the same thing it’s messier for them too.

 

[RileyG]

Probably. However there have been attempts by Anglicans (and some Lutherans) to re-acquire apostolic succession through ordination of bishops by other validly ordained but irregular bishops. This is sometimes by Polish National Catholic bishops or Old Catholic bishops or by odd Orthodox bishops. The state of some of these episcopal ordinations will need to be carefully re-examined as it is different than even a generation ago. We used to say I think rightly that Anglican ordinations were all null and void. But the situation has changed. Some may only be irregular but valid. It’s messier now. And to the extent Lutherans have done the same thing it’s messier for them too.

I wasn't aware of that, thank you!

 

[chevyontheriver]

I wasn't aware of that, thank you!

Yeah, some Anglicans realized that to be serious about reconciling with Catholics or the Orthodox they would have to take Catholic-Orthodox understandings of ordination seriously.

 

[FaithT]

Probably. However there have been attempts by Anglicans (and some Lutherans) to re-acquire apostolic succession through ordination of bishops by other validly ordained but irregular bishops. This is sometimes by Polish National Catholic bishops or Old Catholic bishops or by odd Orthodox bishops. The state of some of these episcopal ordinations will need to be carefully re-examined as it is different than even a generation ago. We used to say I think rightly that Anglican ordinations were all null and void. But the situation has changed. Some may only be irregular but valid. It’s messier now. And to the extent Lutherans have done the same thing it’s messier for them too.

Well, as you know I’ve been struggling with which church I belong. I’m still going the an LCMS church but keep being drawn to my old Catholic parish or another one down the road. Sometimes when I receive communion at the LCMS I feel that they just don’t have the ability to confect the Eucharist. I think I was told that it’s not the pastor who does this, but the Holy Spirit.
The LCMS I belong to is very contemporary, much like a non denominational church and it sometimes feels like something is missing.

 

[RileyG]

Well, as you know I’ve been struggling with which church I belong. I’m still going the an LCMS church but keep being drawn to my old Catholic parish or another one down the road. Sometimes when I receive communion at the LCMS I feel that they just don’t have the ability to confect the Eucharist. I think I was told that it’s not the pastor who does this, but the Holy Spirit.
The LCMS I belong to is very contemporary, much like a non denominational church and it sometimes feels like something is missing.

May God bless you on your journey.

 

[RileyG]

Yeah, some Anglicans realized that to be serious about reconciling with Catholics or the Orthodox they would have to take Catholic-Orthodox understandings of ordination seriously.

That is true. There's the Anglican Ordinariate in the Catholic Church and the Western-Rite use in the Orthodox Church.

 

[FaithT]

May God bless you on your journey.

Thank you!

 

[chevyontheriver]

Well, as you know I’ve been struggling with which church I belong. I’m still going the an LCMS church but keep being drawn to my old Catholic parish or another one down the road. Sometimes when I receive communion at the LCMS I feel that they just don’t have the ability to confect the Eucharist. I think I was told that it’s not the pastor who does this, but the Holy Spirit.
The LCMS I belong to is very contemporary, much like a non denominational church and it sometimes feels like something is missing.

I would point you back to the work of the official Lutheran-Catholic Dialogue documents. They were kind of hopeful. But things change and the hopefulness was kind of smashed flat over time.

But even there the LCMS stands sort of on the outside of those dialogues. The LCMS doesn't necessarily agree on ministry or on ordination with other Lutherans. They seem a bit more prone to agree with Catholics about the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist (Maybe) and are to my way of thinking a better ecumenical partner than the ELCA in that they are interested in conserving the faith rather than reinventing it in some woke way. If I had to pick a Lutheran church to attend it would be some kind of LCMS, although I don't know if I could become a member for theological reasons.

(My mother was Augustana Lutheran way way back. Back when they didn't allow smoking or drinking or playing cards or movies.)

It really depends on intent when ordaining and on episcopacy. The LCMS does not seem to have much of an interest in re-attaining a historic episcopacy. If they don't have a historic episcopacy they probably aren't confecting the Eucharist IMHO. If they don't even want a historic episcopacy I would question their intent to have validly ordained priests, and consequently a valid Eucharist.

Of course other parts of Lutheranism want and now have bishops. They have moved more towards the Orthodox and Catholics. But then they have women bishops, moving away from the Orthodox and Catholics. One wonders what their intent is. Other old world parts of Lutheranism have always had bishops, maybe even bishops in apostolic succession. That kind of depends on the intent of the valid bishops in ordaining new bishops over the generations. It's kind of like do they want to be like the Catholics and Orthodox or not. Some Lutherans do, a bit like the high church Anglo-Catholics within Anglicanism. Others don't, a bit like the low church evangelicals within Anglicanism.

 

[FaithT]

I would point you back to the work of the official Lutheran-Catholic Dialogue documents. They were kind of hopeful. But things change and the hopefulness was kind of smashed flat over time.

But even there the LCMS stands sort of on the outside of those dialogues. The LCMS doesn't necessarily agree on ministry or on ordination with other Lutherans. They seem a bit more prone to agree with Catholics about the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist (Maybe) and are to my way of thinking a better ecumenical partner than the ELCA in that they are interested in conserving the faith rather than reinventing it in some woke way. If I had to pick a Lutheran church to attend it would be some kind of LCMS, although I don't know if I could become a member for theological reasons.

(My mother was Augustana Lutheran way way back. Back when they didn't allow smoking or drinking or playing cards or movies.)

It really depends on intent when ordaining and on episcopacy. The LCMS does not seem to have much of an interest in re-attaining a historic episcopacy. If they don't have a historic episcopacy they probably aren't confecting the Eucharist IMHO. If they don't even want a historic episcopacy I would question their intent to have validly ordained priests, and consequently a valid Eucharist.

Of course other parts of Lutheranism want and now have bishops. They have moved more towards the Orthodox and Catholics. But then they have women bishops, moving away from the Orthodox and Catholics. One wonders what their intent is. Other old world parts of Lutheranism have always had bishops, maybe even bishops in apostolic succession. That kind of depends on the intent of the valid bishops in ordaining new bishops over the generations. It's kind of like do they want to be like the Catholics and Orthodox or not. Some Lutherans do, a bit like the high church Anglo-Catholics within Anglicanism. Others don't, a bit like the low church evangelicals within Anglicanism.

I disagree with the LCMS’s refusal to believe in evolution, age of the universe, among other things. I was bored in the RCC but now I’m getting bored with my church and went to a Catholic Mass a few weeks ago and am missing their Eucharist, Confession, rosary etc.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I disagree with the LCMS’s refusal to believe in evolution, age of the universe, among other things. I was bored in the RCC but now I’m getting bored with my church and went to a Catholic Mass a few weeks ago and am missing their Eucharist, Confession, rosary etc.

That IS another big issue for me with LCMS and especially WELS. Catholics are free to believe that faith and reason are not in conflict. LCMS and WELS force them to be in conflict on evolution, geology, cosmology, and the fossil record. To me there is something wrong with forcing that conflict. Were I to have to be Lutheran I would have to be on the conservative LCMS or WELS side, but their positions on evolution and the history of creation makes that a problem for me too. I want a place where I do not have to 'suspend my disbelief'. It's like watching a science fiction movie. If the movie is really good you don't notice that the physics is just impossible. You just follow the story. A not so good movie and you notice all sorts of issues like that and the movie becomes more of a farce than a good story. Creationism does that for me. It points out the conflict between faith and reason, between dogma and science. At least for Catholics we are allowed and encouraged to put the 'fides' and the 'ratio' together. That was the message of pope John Paul II's encyclical Fides et Ratio, which I recommend especially for you, found here: Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998) | John Paul II

 

[FaithT]

That IS another big issue for me with LCMS and especially WELS. Catholics are free to believe that faith and reason are not in conflict. LCMS and WELS force them to be in conflict on evolution, geology, cosmology, and the fossil record. To me there is something wrong with forcing that conflict. Were I to have to be Lutheran I would have to be on the conservative LCMS or WELS side, but their positions on evolution and the history of creation makes that a problem for me too. I want a place where I do not have to 'suspend my disbelief'. It's like watching a science fiction movie. If the movie is really good you don't notice that the physics is just impossible. You just follow the story. A not so good movie and you notice all sorts of issues like that and the movie becomes more of a farce than a good story. Creationism does that for me. It points out the conflict between faith and reason, between dogma and science. At least for Catholics we are allowed and encouraged to put the 'fides' and the 'ratio' together. That was the message of pope John Paul II's encyclical Fides et Ratio, which I recommend especially for you, found here: Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998) | John Paul II

Thanks! That’s a LOOOOONG encyclical. I’ll read it when I’ve got the time.
Some people on another Christian forum think it’s foolish to have so many problems with the LCMSs church teaching on evolution and age of the universe, but it just doesn’t sit well with me. My husband started going to church at the LCMS I speak of and he is fairly liberal and he too believes in evolution and an old age for the universe but it doesn’t bother him. IF I return to the RCC I’ll go with him to the LCMS sometimes just so he doesn’t have to go alone. He only started going there because I did. And he’ll never become Catholic.

 

[FaithT]

That IS another big issue for me with LCMS and especially WELS. Catholics are free to believe that faith and reason are not in conflict. LCMS and WELS force them to be in conflict on evolution, geology, cosmology, and the fossil record. To me there is something wrong with forcing that conflict. Were I to have to be Lutheran I would have to be on the conservative LCMS or WELS side, but their positions on evolution and the history of creation makes that a problem for me too. I want a place where I do not have to 'suspend my disbelief'. It's like watching a science fiction movie. If the movie is really good you don't notice that the physics is just impossible. You just follow the story. A not so good movie and you notice all sorts of issues like that and the movie becomes more of a farce than a good story. Creationism does that for me. It points out the conflict between faith and reason, between dogma and science. At least for Catholics we are allowed and encouraged to put the 'fides' and the 'ratio' together. That was the message of pope John Paul II's encyclical Fides et Ratio, which I recommend especially for you, found here: Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998) | John Paul II

I’ve read all I can about their beliefs in evolution and age of the universe. I’ve read numerous articles from more conservative websites and even posted somewhat on the creation and theistic evolution subforum here to learn about the other side of this debate but the evidence is overwhelming for evolution and old ages. I‘ve tried to believe as the LCMS does but I just don’t. Posters from the other boards are more concerned about the RCC doctrine of Mary, purgatory, saints and other issues but they don’t bother me like the glaringly obvious truth that the earth is old and we likely evolved, albeit by theistic evolution.

 

[RileyG]

I’ve read all I can about their beliefs in evolution and age of the universe. I’ve read numerous articles from more conservative websites and even posted somewhat on the creation and theistic evolution subforum here to learn about the other side of this debate but the evidence is overwhelming for evolution and old ages. I‘ve tried to believe as the LCMS does but I just don’t. Posters from the other boards are more concerned about the RCC doctrine of Mary, purgatory, saints and other issues but they don’t bother me like the glaringly obvious truth that the earth is old and we likely evolved, albeit by theistic evolution.

Feel free to ask more questions regarding Mary, Purgatory, and the Saints in here if you want! God bless you and keep you