But is there really a “completely different understanding about what is going on”?
I have talked to several priests about this (both Catholic and Lutheran) and this is my understanding of the issue:
I am Lutheran and my understanding of communion is that Christ is present in the Eucharist. Christ is present in the Lutheran perception of Eucharist, we just don’t go the next step and define HOW he is present. The catholic church does. That makes me question how different the two forms of a similar sacrament actually are.
I know that communion in the Catholic Church also acts as a bond between the worshiper and the one true church. By accepting communion a follower is accepting Catholic doctrine and entering fellowship with others of the same beliefs. That is why I don’t take communion from the Catholic Church. Not because of the metaphysical presence of Jesus as defined by the Catholic Church, but out of respect for those who adhere to the practices of Catholicism. They have a right to exclude me from the sacrament, because I do not profess my allegience to their church.
Calling someone “woefully ignorant” because they took communion at a Catholic service isn’t necessary. The underlying theology is a shade of Grey and is easily misunderstood.
I’m sure many of you will disagree, but I hope this clears up some of the misconceptions about the Lutherans believing Jesus isn’t there and the Catholics believing they are eating Jesus’s flesh. The theology is much more complicated than that (like most theology is :)
Ask your priests (or your fellow perisheners). You’ll be shocked at the number of different explanations you receive for what the sacrament means, their interpretation of it, and the reasons it is restricted to followers of the Church .
Lutheran view:
"For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical transubstantiation may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated;"
Sounds like the fathers of your faith wouldn't agree.
http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php The Holy Supper Para. 35
Perhaps you ought to look for a better Lutheran priest.
The Calvinists would be even further from Rome.