Do all of the Christians who account themselves "Traditional" in their theology accept that the real presence is a physical reality?

I think it depends what you mean by physical. I don't believe the molecules, the physical/chemical structure of the bread and wine change (yet we somehow don't perceive that change). But I believe that Christ is present to and active in us when we receive the elements, in a real and tangible way which goes beyond God's presence in all things.

I like how the AMP says it..

"For anyone who eats and drinks [without solemn reverence and heartfelt gratitude for the sacrifice of Christ], eats and drinks a judgment on himself if he does not recognize the body [of Christ]. That [careless and unworthy participation] is the reason why many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep [in death]." A truth that still happens today and one of the reasons some are sick or die yet they believe it to be something else not knowing this could be the reason they are sick or die.

In the church where I grew up, communion wafers were often a flat cracker (biscuits to those in the UK), purchased at a grocer and often a form of saltine. The wine was grape juice. And the children would get into the left-overs after the service. Yours truly participated often, without my parent's knowledge. The logic of the adults was that it wouldn't keep until the next communion / Lord's Supper. But it gave us a sense of irreverence. We ate and drank those leftovers without solemn reverence toward Christ, or heartfelt gratitude for what He did for us, with our own sin and need never entering our minds. That, I think, is the point of 1 Corinthians 11:29-30.

Others can argue about transubstantiation. Some argue more about that than Salvation through Christ Himself. First and foremost, communion is about Christ and what He did for us and our need for what He did. If we lose sight of that, then we lose sight of communion, whether we believe in transubstantiation or not.

Xeno.of.athens said:

From an Orthodox and Catholic perspective, the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper are believed to become the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ through a mystical transformation. This transformation is understood to be a result of the priest's consecration during the celebration of the sacrament. Believers hold that they are receiving the body and blood of Jesus in a real and tangible way, as a source of grace and spiritual nourishment. This belief is considered a central aspect of the sacrament, and is seen as a way to participate in the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross and to be united with him and with the community of believers.

Click to expand...

This is a perfect example of men's religion that have nothing to do with scripture.

Peace,

Jff

Xeno.of.athens said:

From an Orthodox and Catholic perspective, the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper are believed to become the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ through a mystical transformation. This transformation is understood to be a result of the priest's consecration during the celebration of the sacrament. Believers hold that they are receiving the body and blood of Jesus in a real and tangible way, as a source of grace and spiritual nourishment. This belief is considered a central aspect of the sacrament, and is seen as a way to participate in the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross and to be united with him and with the community of believers.

Click to expand...

The problem with that is that by "participating" in Christ's sacrifice in any way, you are earning merit for your forgiveness, thereby sharing in and diminishing Christ's role in your redemption. . .contra-NT.

We only receive, through faith alone, we do not participate in its merit in any way, unless by "participating" you mean "receiving," which is confusing.

Xeno.of.athens said:

From an Orthodox and Catholic perspective, the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper are believed to become the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ through a mystical transformation. This transformation is understood to be a result of the priest's consecration during the celebration of the sacrament. Believers hold that they are receiving the body and blood of Jesus in a real and tangible way, as a source of grace and spiritual nourishment. This belief is considered a central aspect of the sacrament, and is seen as a way to participate in the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross and to be united with him and with the community of believers.

Click to expand...

The main problem is the diversity of views in Anglicanism, so whereas Anglo Catholics often believe in the above, Anglicans of low, broad or even some high church Anglicans might not. And Anglicanism is definitely traditional Christianity.

Xeno.of.athens said:

Some say variety is the spice of life.

Click to expand...

Well I will say I am extremely thankful for Anglo Catholic parishes like St. Thomas Fifth Ave, St. Magnus the Martyr, St. Bartholomew the Great and All Saints Margaret Street given Traditiones Custodes and also the Novus Ordo more generally, in that these Anglo Catholic parishes spend a fortune on vestments and paraments such as elaborately embroidered frontals and reredos and who together with the Oratorians, FSSP, ICKSP and the SSPX are probably keeping several liturgical artisans in business.

Speaking of which, Fr. Zuhlsdorf whose wonderful blog wdtprs made a post showing the wonderful liturgical fabric shops in Rome.

One other point - increasingly in the US there are now several purely Anglo Catholic continuing Anglican jurisdictions, some of which even go so far as to affirm seven sacraments.

As an Orthodox Christian, I believe this Holy Mystery is true. Just before you receive the Eucharist , the priest says "may this be for the remission of sins and eternal life" .

Xeno.of.athens said:

Benedict XVI started, I think, a Ordinariate under the Roman Rite that uses a Missal based on the Book Of Common Prayer, it is welcoming to and for Anglicans and Episcopalians. I imagine you are aware of this. But in case you're not then I hope it is useful.

PS: The Ordinariate is working on a KJV Catholic Edition. I think they have made considerable progress and intend to publish.

Click to expand...

I am aware of the Ordinariate.

Frankly I can’t see how a KJV Catholic Edition would differ from a full copy of the KJV, which includes the Deuterocanonicals, other than to replace the Psalter with the Septuagint Psalter (assuming the Vulgate/Douai Rheims pattern is followed), which would break compatibility with the BCP which assumes MT versification, and also to delete or rename the Apocrypha section.

I also have to confess I am a huge fan of the Challoner Douai-Rheims and object to the idea of a KJV Catholic Edition because it would further reduce the use of that excellent Bible, as well as other traditional language Bibles of Roman Catholic provenance such as the exquisite Knox Bible, hosted on newadvent.org.

In what sense could they be considered traditional if they did not? Anyone can wear some vestments or light some candles or what have you.

YeshuaFollower said:

This is a perfect example of men's religion that have nothing to do with scripture.

Peace,

Jff

Click to expand...

Please make sure you read the SOP for the Traditional Theology forum.

YeshuaFollower said:

This is a perfect example of men's religion that have nothing to do with scripture.

Click to expand...

Here's some Scripture you may have missed:
1 Corinthians 11
23For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread,
24And giving thanks, broke and said: Take ye and eat: This is my body, which shall be delivered for you. This do for the commemoration of me.
25In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood.

Our Lord, God Incarnate, said "This is my body" and "This...is the new testament in my blood." No amount of rationalization or circumlocution or creative exegesis can change what He said, and we can take it or leave it. I will take it, as spoken. You may do as seems good to you.

Well, let's put it this way: for an orthodox christian, Confession and the Eucharist are necessary for salvation. So, then 'all' orthodox believe that the bread and wine are the actual Blood and Flesh of The Lord without changing the appearance of bread and wine, if they want to be saved.

Xeno.of.athens said:

From an Orthodox and Catholic perspective, the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper are believed to become the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ through a mystical transformation. This transformation is understood to be a result of the priest's consecration during the celebration of the sacrament. Believers hold that they are receiving the body and blood of Jesus in a real and tangible way, as a source of grace and spiritual nourishment. This belief is considered a central aspect of the sacrament, and is seen as a way to participate in the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross and to be united with him and with the community of believers.

Click to expand...

As a former Lutheran, Lutherans would also argue for a Real Presence of the body and blood of Christ "with, in, and under" the bread and wine. These are two quotes from the Formula of Concord - Epitome

VII. The Lord's Supper.

1 Although the Zwinglian teachers are not to be reckoned among the theologians who affiliate with [acknowledge and profess] the Augsburg Confession, as they separated from them at the very time when this Confession was presented, nevertheless, since they are intruding themselves [into their...

bookofconcord.org

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.

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 gives 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.