Can anyone explain the different views of the Eucharist?

[Albion]

?

My church only uses the historic Book, so I'm not always "up" on the 1979 Book adopted by one province of the worldwide Anglican Communion. On the other hand, I read there "make present," not "sacrifice" or "present again to the Father."

 

[MKJ]

In Tom Wright terms, in the Eucharist the past event of crucifixion, now, and the future event are telescoped together in time just as the Passover meal telescoped together exodus, 'now' and ultimate release from bondage.

Yeah, I would probably be comfortable with that. It is a radical intersection of that particular historical event, the present moment you are in, the final form of things when everything is reconciled to God, and I suppose also the moment of creation.

So it is a sacrifice that you are present at, because it was a sacrifice - there is one sacrifice happening outside of time, in time, and present in many moments as well.

 

[everbecoming2007]

Yeah, I would probably be comfortable with that. It is a radical intersection of that particular historical event, the present moment you are in, the final form of things when everything is reconciled to God, and I suppose also the moment of creation.

So it is a sacrifice that you are present at, because it was a sacrifice - there is one sacrifice happening outside of time, in time, and present in many moments as well.

This is a beautiful description and the same understanding my priest presented to me when preparing for baptism. Thank you.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

The Lutheran position is referred to as the Sacramental Union or the Real Presence. The analogy that is used in the Formula of Concord is that it is a parallel to the union of the two natures of Christ so that the body and blood of Christ are "in, with, and under" the bread and wine.

In fact, consubstantiation is rejected by Lutherans as a scholastic misrepresentation of their position.

Brian (former Missouri Synod elder)

 

[MKJ]

The Lutheran position is referred to as the Sacramental Union or the Real Presence. The analogy that is used in the Formula of Concord is that it is a parallel to the union of the two natures of Christ so that the body and blood of Christ are "in, with, and under" the bread and wine.

In fact, consubstantiation is rejected by Lutherans as a scholastic misrepresentation of their position.

Brian (former Missouri Synod elder)

Yes, it still seems popular among some to say they believe in consubstantiation though. Maybe more-so among Anglicans than Lutherans, I am not sure.

 

[singlecandle]

Yeah, I would probably be comfortable with that. It is a radical intersection of that particular historical event, the present moment you are in, the final form of things when everything is reconciled to God, and I suppose also the moment of creation.

So it is a sacrifice that you are present at, because it was a sacrifice - there is one sacrifice happening outside of time, in time, and present in many moments as well.

This is a beautiful description and the same understanding my priest presented to me when preparing for baptism. Thank you.

That IS beautiful. Well said.

 

[Crandaddy]

hello-- one thing to consider-- only the catholic sacrament of "orders" is considered real or apostolic ,

No, I assure you, we consider our orders to be very real and apostolic.

this is why the "real presence" is only symbolic in the other domonation's , (example protestants, evangelicals etc)

No again. The consecrated bread and wine are truly Christ's Body and Blood. They are not merely symbolic.

 

[Albion]

hello-- one thing to consider-- only the catholic sacrament of "orders" is considered real or apostolic ,

this is why the "real presence" is only symbolic in the other domonation's , (example protestants, evangelicals etc)

You don't know much about this subject, do you? MOST Protestants belong to churches that believe in the Real Presence.

 

[Cappadocious]

They are not merely symbolic.

They are symbolic in the prenominalistic sense of the word.

 

[Crandaddy]

They are symbolic in the prenominalistic sense of the word.

Not sure I get your meaning.

 

[Cappadocious]

Not sure I get your meaning.

Symbol = the vehicle by which a prototype is delivered.

Vs. Symbol = a disconnected reference to something else.

 

[Crandaddy]

Symbol = the vehicle by which a prototype is delivered.

Vs. Symbol = a disconnected reference to something else.

Well, the pre-consecrated bread and wine symbolize Christ's Body and Blood, respectively, and they're vehicles of the Eucharistic Sacrifice in that once the priest consecrates them on the Holy Altar they actually become the Body and Blood of Christ for the faithful to partake of.

 

[Albion]

Well, the pre-consecrated bread and wine symbolize Christ's Body and Blood, respectively, and they're vehicles of the Eucharistic Sacrifice in that once the priest consecrates them on the Holy Altar they actually become the Body and Blood of Christ for the faithful to partake of.

However, that connection doesn't actually exist. While the ceremony itself commemorates the Last Supper and the Crucifixion, the sacrifice that occurs is only the sacrifice of ourselves and of our "praise and thanksgiving."

 

[ContraMundum]

Well, the pre-consecrated bread and wine symbolize Christ's Body and Blood, respectively, and they're vehicles of the Eucharistic Sacrifice in that once the priest consecrates them on the Holy Altar they actually become the Body and Blood of Christ for the faithful to partake of.

Hmm...try to find that explicitly taught in the NT! I've been looking for decades. (yeah, I know, you can build an argument for it if you try hard enough)

 

[MKJ]

I guess it is a good think we are not New Testament-onlyists!

 

[Sean611]

I guess it is a good think we are not New Testament-onlyists!

Indeed and it's good that Anglicans have tradition, scripture, and reason to guide us. After all, the early New Testament church didn't have a complete Bible with the New Testament canon to rely on and somehow they made it work. I guess that would rule out the idea of the Bible onlyists.

 

[Albion]

Indeed and it's good that Anglicans have tradition, scripture, and reason to guide us. After all, the early New Testament church didn't have a complete Bible with the New Testament canon to rely on and somehow they made it work.

I guess that would rule out the idea of the Bible onlyists.

For the first several generations--assuming that having merely 80% or 90% of the word of God is worthless.

 

[MKJ]

THe point is, you can't get Christianity in any orthodox form from a strict "only if we see it in the NT" approach, or even if we include the OT.

THat was never the approach of the Reformers, and now that there are Christian groups that try to take that approach, we can see where it leads - to some very strange places theologically. Just look at the bad eschatology of those groups, many of them reject the idea of the Church as an institution at all, while other groups have wildly different perspective from those - you can build almost anything or nothing based on your preconceptions or what you like, based on Scripture alone.

 

[Cappadocious]

Well, the pre-consecrated bread and wine symbolize Christ's Body and Blood, respectively, and they're vehicles of the Eucharistic Sacrifice in that once the priest consecrates them on the Holy Altar they actually become the Body and Blood of Christ for the faithful to partake of.

My point is that the Eucharist partaken of is a symbol. It is a true symbol-- a coming together. A true symbol is participation in something "actually".

 

[Crandaddy]

However, that connection doesn't actually exist. While the ceremony itself commemorates the Last Supper and the Crucifixion, the sacrifice that occurs is only the sacrifice of ourselves and of our "praise and thanksgiving."

We do give ourselves and our praise and thanksgiving as a sort of sacrificial offering, but there's also a sense in which the one perfect and all-sufficient Sacrifice of Christ is made present at the Altar of Consecration when the priest says the Words of Institution (or alternatively, when he prays the Epiclesis, for you Orthodox).

Christ is not re-sacrificed at every Mass, but His one historical Sacrifice of Himself is somehow mystically made present at the Holy Altar when the priest consecrates the bread and wine in the Eucharist.