Question about Communion

[overnight]

I was sitting tonight thinking. As far as I know there are about 5 different thoughts about communion. I will tell you what I think they are (you can add any if I missed one) and I hope that people who are a part of the dogmas I mention will speak up and tell us more about it.

Transubstantation: Thought where the Bread and Wine literally turn into the Body and Blood of Jesus Chirst. Catholic tradition. Only confirmed Catholics may partake of this.

Real Presence: (the one I know lest about) Lutherian tradition. (Please someone tell me more abou this. Are there other denoms that practice this? What is its meaning? Who can partake?)

Sacrament: THought where there is an experiance where no matter the state of your soul the taking of commuinion bestows grace. (Please help I'm a methodists and subscribe to this and still have trouble explaining it). Wesley Tradition. All who love Jesus may take of it. (children as well)

Memorial: Thought that there is no special happening when communion is taken but just to remember that Jesus died for our sins. The Baptist church is one(others?) You do not have to be member of the church but you do have to claim salvation.

Not important: There is no need to take communion. Quakers (although some do take it) [There may be others here as well].

 

[Rechtgläubig]

Real Presence: (the one I know lest about) Lutherian tradition. (Please someone tell me more abou this. Are there other denoms that practice this? What is its meaning? Who can partake?)

Hi Overnight

Real presence is really pretty simple:

4 things are recieved at Communion:
1)bread
2)Christ's Body
3)wine
4)Christ's Blood

54] The Tenth Article has been approved, in which we confess that we believe, that in the Lord's Supper the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present, and are truly tendered, with those things which are seen, bread and wine, to those who receive the Sacrament.
http://bookofconcord.org/augsburgdefense/8_holysupper.html

8] 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. 9] 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.

10] It is the Word (I say) which makes and distinguishes this Sacrament, so that it is not mere bread and wine, but is, and is called, the body and blood of Christ. For it is said: Accedat verbum ad elementum, et fit sacramentum. If the Word be joined to the element, it becomes a Sacrament. This saying of St. Augustine is so properly and so well put that he has scarcely said anything better. The Word must make a Sacrament of the element, else it remains a mere element. 11] Now, it is not the word or ordinance of a prince or emperor, but of the sublime Majesty, at whose feet all creatures should fall, and affirm it is as He says, and accept it with all reverence, fear, and humility.

12] With this Word you can strengthen your conscience and say: If a hundred thousand devils, together with all fanatics, should rush forward, crying, How can bread and wine be the body and blood of Christ? etc., I know that all spirits and scholars together are not as wise as is the Divine Majesty in His little finger. 13] Now here stands the Word of Christ: Take, eat; this is My body; Drink ye all of it; this is the new testament in My blood, etc. Here we abide, and would like to see those who will constitute themselves His masters, and make it different from what He has spoken. It is true, indeed, that if you take away the Word or regard it without the words, you have nothing but mere bread and wine. 14] But if the words remain with them, as they shall and must, then, in virtue of the same, it is truly the body and blood of Christ. For as the lips of Christ say and speak, so it is, as He can never lie or deceive.

 

[InnerPhyre]

Here's a bit of info on Transubstantiation, which is also the dogma of the Real Presence. I believe Orthodox hold this belief too, though they choose not to explain it, and just leave it as a mystery.

THE REAL PRESENCE

Another doctrine that has been under threat is the Real Presence of Christ and, in particular, the fact that the bread and wine are transubstantiated. In some places the Real Presence is affirmed while transubstantiation is ignored or denied, leading the faithful to think that Jesus is merely present “in the bread and the wine.” Other times the uniqueness of Christ’s presence in the Eucharist is subverted by emphasis on Christ’s presence “in the community,” as if this were equal to his presence in the Eucharist.

To counter these, the Pope emphasizes: “The sacramental re-presentation of Christ’s sacrifice . . . in the Mass involves a most special presence that—in the words of Paul VI—‘is called “real” not as a way of excluding all other types of presence as if they were “not real,” but because it is a presence in the fullest sense: a substantial presence whereby Christ, the God-Man, is wholly and entirely present’” (15; cf. Mysterium Fidei, 39).

Further, at the consecration the bread and wine cease to exist, leaving only their appearances cloaking the Real Presence of Christ. John Paul II explains: “There remains the boundary indicated by Paul VI: ‘Every theological explanation that seeks some understanding of this mystery, in order to be in accord with Catholic faith, must firmly maintain that, in objective reality, independently of our mind, the bread and wine have ceased to exist after the consecration, so that the adorable body and blood of the Lord Jesus from that moment on are really before us under the sacramental species of bread and wine’” (EDE 15; cf. Solemn Profession of Faith, 25).

Catholics in a state of Grace may partake of the Eucharist. We also allow the Orthodox to partake, although they are not permitted to do so by the rules of their own church.

 

[herev]

I was sitting tonight thinking. As far as I know there are about 5 different thoughts about communion. I will tell you what I think they are (you can add any if I missed one) and I hope that people who are a part of the dogmas I mention will speak up and tell us more about it.

Transubstantation: Thought where the Bread and Wine literally turn into the Body and Blood of Jesus Chirst. Catholic tradition. Only confirmed Catholics may partake of this.

Real Presence: (the one I know lest about) Lutherian tradition. (Please someone tell me more abou this. Are there other denoms that practice this? What is its meaning? Who can partake?)

Sacrament: THought where there is an experiance where no matter the state of your soul the taking of commuinion bestows grace. (Please help I'm a methodists and subscribe to this and still have trouble explaining it). Wesley Tradition. All who love Jesus may take of it. (children as well)

Memorial: Thought that there is no special happening when communion is taken but just to remember that Jesus died for our sins. The Baptist church is one(others?) You do not have to be member of the church but you do have to claim salvation.

Not important: There is no need to take communion. Quakers (although some do take it) [There may be others here as well].

Overnight, one of the things that your post suggests is that the terms are all mutually exclusive--they are not. For example, just for our denomination (UMethodist), we believe it is a sacrament, but we also believe in the very real presence of Christ. Roman Catholics believe in both of those, but also Transubstantiation. Lutherans believe it is a sacrament, they believe in real presence, but also in consubstantiation...so it's not as simple as it seems (it never is, is it?

 

[PaladinValer]

We Anglicans are mostly consubstantiationists like the Orthodox, Lutherans, and Methodists. A few of us are transubstantiationists like the Catholics.

 

[SPALATIN]

We Anglicans are mostly consubstantiationists like the Orthodox, Lutherans, and Methodists. A few of us are transubstantiationists like the Catholics.

Ahem, Lutherans are neither Transubstationist or Consubstantianists. We believe in the Real Presence of Christ in, with and under the elements. We also see it as a means of Grace by which we receive forgiveness of sins.

Scott

 

[herev]

We Anglicans are mostly consubstantiationists like the Orthodox, Lutherans, and Methodists. A few of us are transubstantiationists like the Catholics.

Yeah, we Untied Methodist are REal Presence too, not Consubtantiationalists

 

[Iosias]

Transubstantation: Thought where the Bread and Wine literally turn into the Body and Blood of Jesus Chirst. Catholic tradition. Only confirmed Catholics may partake of this.

Catholics believe that the Lord's Supper is a Mass, a continual sacrifice of Jesus...I do not want to go into too much detail lest I be attacked for RC bashing but feel free to PM me for more info!

Real Presence: (the one I know lest about) Lutherian tradition. (Please someone tell me more abou this. Are there other denoms that practice this? What is its meaning? Who can partake?)

This is also held by some if not most Methodists. I am probably closest to this one!!

Memorial: Thought that there is no special happening when communion is taken but just to remember that Jesus died for our sins. The Baptist church is one(others?) You do not have to be member of the church but you do have to claim salvation.

But I attend a Baptist church which adheres to this!!

Not important: There is no need to take communion. Quakers (although some do take it) [There may be others here as well].

May also be ultradispensationalists!!

 

[Bradford]

I was sitting tonight thinking. As far as I know there are about 5 different thoughts about communion. I will tell you what I think they are (you can add any if I missed one) and I hope that people who are a part of the dogmas I mention will speak up and tell us more about it.

Transubstantation: Thought where the Bread and Wine literally turn into the Body and Blood of Jesus Chirst. Catholic tradition. Only confirmed Catholics may partake of this.

Real Presence: (the one I know lest about) Lutherian tradition. (Please someone tell me more abou this. Are there other denoms that practice this? What is its meaning? Who can partake?)

Sacrament: THought where there is an experiance where no matter the state of your soul the taking of commuinion bestows grace. (Please help I'm a methodists and subscribe to this and still have trouble explaining it). Wesley Tradition. All who love Jesus may take of it. (children as well)

Memorial: Thought that there is no special happening when communion is taken but just to remember that Jesus died for our sins. The Baptist church is one(others?) You do not have to be member of the church but you do have to claim salvation.

Not important: There is no need to take communion. Quakers (although some do take it) [There may be others here as well].

Sixth: Calvinism: Christ is spiritually present, and it is a means of grace, but no physical presence in the Bread and Wine

 

[PaladinValer]

Consubstantiationism, or so I thought, is that the Christ is visibly a part of the bread and wine, but the bread is still bread and the wine is still wine. As far as I remember, Lutherans and Wesleyan Traditions adhere to this. Can you explain how this isn't so?

And no 1611, you're dead wrong on Vatican Catholics thinking that the Mass is a continual sacrifice. That isn't Vatican Catholic teaching and it would be who of you to not spread lies about other's churches.

 

[overnight]

Sixth: Calvinism: Christ is spiritually present, and it is a means of grace, but no physical presence in the Bread and Wine

True I thought that lined close with the memorial idea though.


Herev you are right that at least for the first three on my list they are all sacraments to those who choose to follow it. I just thought that there seems to be a difference between what Luthers (for one example) and we(UMers) think. I agree that there is a real presence thought but the way it was explained to me it seemed different. maybe I'm wrong or it is just as complicated as you suggest.

The explination to me about the way (United Methodists in general) see communion is that the Holy Spirit comes and applies grace so that no matter the sate of your soul (although not saved by taking communion) grace is applied to a person. (this is why children are allowed commuion and why we have open commuion). The way real presence was ewxplained in that although the wine and bread do not literally turn into the body and blood Christ is present in a real way. Also (according to the pastor who explained it to me) you had to be a member of the Church to take it.
Maybe a (Missori synod) Lutheran (or someone who knows more about this) could help clear this up some.

 

[herev]

Consubstantiationism, or so I thought, is that the Christ is visibly a part of the bread and wine, but the bread is still bread and the wine is still wine. As far as I remember, Lutherans and Wesleyan Traditions adhere to this. Can you explain how this isn't so?

And no 1611, you're dead wrong on Vatican Catholics thinking that the Mass is a continual sacrifice. That isn't Vatican Catholic teaching and it would be who of you to not spread lies about other's churches.

We united Methodist belive do not believe in Consubstantiation or transubstantiation, we do however believe that through the meal, we are taken into the real presense of Jesus Christ. He is there at the Lord's table with all who commune.
Here are a couple of links that might explain it better than I

http://www.revneal.org/Writings/holycommunion5.html

and this one is particularly helpful for much discussion between methodist and catholics

http://www.catholicbook.org/seia/methcath.htm

hope that helps some

 

[herev]

The explination to me about the way (United Methodists in general) see communion is that the Holy Spirit comes and applies grace so that no matter the sate of your soul (although not saved by taking communion) grace is applied to a person. (this is why children are allowed commuion and why we have open commuion). The way real presence was ewxplained in that although the wine and bread do not literally turn into the body and blood Christ is present in a real way. Also (according to the pastor who explained it to me) you had to be a member of the Church to take it.

Both are true for UM theology and doctrine, it is a Means of Grace and it is the very real presence of Christ, but we do not require one to be a member of the church to partake.
check out the link in the above post
thanks
tommy

 

[PaladinValer]

I do go to Rev. Neal's website quite often. The man's an excellent scholar, a fabulous preacher, and quite the humble Christian.

I honestly still don't see the difference between "Real Presence" and consubstantiationism. Maybe I'm being thick (known to happen), but to my knowledge, they are one in the same.

 

[herev]

I do go to Rev. Neal's website quite often. The man's an excellent scholar, a fabulous preacher, and quite the humble Christian.

I honestly still don't see the difference between "Real Presence" and consubstantiationism. Maybe I'm being thick (known to happen), but to my knowledge, they are one in the same.

the way it was taught to me (though these are my own inadequate words) was that while transubstantiation beleives that the elements actually change on the subatomic level--they actually are the body and blood of Christ, consubstantiation says that they actually change to the body and blood of christ, but the "accidents" remain the same--in other words, they still look like bread and wine. Real presence (as a weslyan) doesn't suggest that the bread and wine are anything but bread and wine, but Christ is still present. I'll try to track down some of my seminary books from Christian History tomorrow and hopefully clarify better.

 

[herev]

the way it was taught to me (though these are my own inadequate words) was that while transubstantiation beleives that the elements actually change on the subatomic level--they actually are the body and blood of Christ, consubstantiation says that they actually change to the body and blood of christ, but the "accidents" remain the same--in other words, they still look like bread and wine. Real presence (as a weslyan) doesn't suggest that the bread and wine are anything but bread and wine, but Christ is still present. I'll try to track down some of my seminary books from Christian History tomorrow and hopefully clarify better.

here's a good definition of consubstantiation from this website:

http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/consubstantiation

Definition: \Con`sub*stan`ti*a"tion\ (?; 106), n.1. An identity or union of substance.2. (Theol.) The actual, substantial presence of the body of Christ with the bread and wine of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper; impanation; -- opposed to transubstantiation.Note: This view, held by Luther himself, was called consubstantiation by non Lutheran writers in contradistinction to transsubstantiation, the Catholic view.

and here's another good website, but be forewarned, it is not without its biases
http://www.stjohnadulted.org/The_08.htm

 

[PaladinValer]

Isn't that a Methodist/Wesleyan/Nazarene belief as well? It certainly is Anglican.

 

[herev]

Isn't that a Methodist/Wesleyan/Nazarene belief as well? It certainly is Anglican.

sorry, I'm lost, which is what who belive?

 

[overnight]

it truley is more confusing than I thought. Question do churches other than the Catholic church have closed communion (only members can partake)? I know the Baptist church has (my words) mostly open communion in that you have to "be saved" to take communion. In the UMC anyone (saved or not) may partake. So it seems that there are at lest three ways of handling the taking of. Open (all can come and take) Mostly open (all can come as long as you can claim salvation) Closed (only members of the Denomination* can partake)

 

[InnerPhyre]

Catholics believe that the Lord's Supper is a Mass, a continual sacrifice of Jesus...I do not want to go into too much detail lest I be attacked for RC bashing but feel free to PM me for more info!

Not true. Come to OBOB if you want it explained better, but it's not a continual sacrifice of Jesus. We believe that the one sacrifice that Jesus made is made present to us at the Mass.