Lutherans DO believe in the true presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist
And so do many traditional, conservative Anglicans
I respectfully submit that these Lutherans, Anglicans etc. should not be clubbed with those who form their own cult of personality....
>> CynicalBear: wafer Christ <<
>> If you want to build your own religion around chips, go ahead. Christians like Catholics, Orthodox, Presbyterians, Pentecostals, Lutherans, etc. will worship Christ. <<
Sorry, Cronos. Although his conclusions are monstrous, CB is partly right on this one. Lutherans believe in consubstantiation, which means that the wafer retains its bread nature. This would mean that the bread is Christ. As Catholics, we belief that even though it retains the formal accident of bread (”What is its form?”), it’s essence (”What is it?”) is no longer bread. So where CB’s accusation could be an incredibly crass description of Luther’s position, it is a falsehood to the Catholic position.
(In other words, although Catholics say it retains the form of bread, it has solely the substance of the Body of Christ; Luther argued it retains both the form and substance of bread, while attaining the added substance of the Body of Christ.)
Many other Protestant groups hold the position which is at first easy to believe, but which is philosophically absurd: that the presence of Christ is SUBJECTIVELY present. That means that if I have faith that I am receiving Christ, then I am receiving Christ. That makes Jesus out to be like Tinkerbell. I don’t imagine Him into or out of existence.
The bible is clear, that he that eats and drinks unworthily, without discerning the body of Christ, drinks death apon himself. In other words, if they eat what appears to be bread, without recognizing that it is in fact the body of Christ, then they will suffer death, rather than immortality. This is why sharing the Eucharist with Protestants may SEEM like a friendly, inclusive thing to do, but is in reality a horrible cruelty. And why the modern failure of so many Catholics to teach the transubstantiation is an abominable crisis.
Of course, CB believes it’s mere bread, so this is yet another passage he must throw away.
(Note: some Protestants argue that the phrase, “let him eat of the bread” means that it is bread, thus justifying Luther’s position. The real word translated as “of,” “eck” means “of” in the sense of “from.” Hence, the next phrase “and drink of the cup” doesn’t mean he consumes the cup, but what comes from the cup. Likewise, “eat of the bread” does not mean to consume bread, but that which comes from the bread.)
Excellent point and I strongly agree.