QnA: Biblioatry, The Real Presence in the Supper, How can a Lutheran consecrate? 

Switching churches can be difficult. I'll pray for you in this big move. That's awesome that the kids are already getting intrigued!

@@jonathanhamilton2504 Thank you for the prayers. :)

Our family just left the Nazarene church to attend LCMS. Not easy. Painful but oh sooo wonderful and comforting!

I agree with you. Problem is the LCMS has a congregational polity. It can seem sometimes that trying to get everyone on the same page, even for a good thing, can be like trying to herd a flock of cats. But it is necessary. Greater danger lies with giving too much power to overreach to the Synod.

@@logicaredux5205 that makes sense. I have 3 cats and hearding cats is a real and difficult thing!😄

He would likely say check both the small and large Catechisms for prayer basics - but there are also prayers in the service book

Pastor Wolfmueller and Rev Fisk would also point you to praying the Psalms.

@@sidneyloggins2487 not really the point of the question, but thanks for the reply.

@@hilarybrown664 not what I was getting at but thanks for the answer. Also I would warry of Fisk - he keeps some uncomfortable company. There's a reason you don't see woflmueller doing videos with him anymore.

@@Bryan-je5nz I thought I would mention Psalms, Rev Fisk, and Pastor Wolfmueller because Wolfmuller had mentioned in a video that he joined reading/praying the Sons of Solomon that Fisk created. I bought the Psalms with Luther which has an explanation and prayer attached to each Psalm and Psalms listed to pray throughout the church year; it's been a blessing. Anyway, I hope you find the answer to your question. God bless you.

The three offices of bishop, priest, and deacon were set by approximately 150 AD. And the term "papist" is a slur which this regular Roman Catholic listener resents.....especially from a Lutheran pastor who should know better.

In the 1500’s Martin Luther claimed Jesus Christ intended at the Lord’s Supper for His flesh and blood to be put “in, with and under” the bread and wine. For 1500yrs it had been Christian consensus and Christian tradition that Jesus Christ intended at the Lord’s Supper for the bread and wine to become His flesh and blood. Jesus Christ said “this is my body” and “this is my blood” - nothing whatsoever about His flesh and blood being “in, with and under” the bread and wine. The idea that Martin Luther got it right with his totally unique theory and the Catholics/Orthodox had got it wrong for 1500yrs is utterly preposterous.

Please read some of the teachings of the early Catholic/Orthodox Church fathers on the Eucharist and you will see none of them believed in Martin Luther's "in, with and under" theory ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH “the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead." ("Letter to the Smyrnaeans", paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.) "I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed." ("Letter to the Romans", paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D.) "Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons." (Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.) ST. JUSTIN MARTYR "This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God's Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus." ("First Apology", Ch. 66, inter A.D. 148-155) ST. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA "The Word is everything to a child: both Father and Mother, both Instructor and Nurse. 'Eat My Flesh,' He says, 'and drink My Blood.' The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients. He delivers over His Flesh, and pours out His Blood; and nothing is lacking for the growth of His children. O incredible mystery!" ("The Instructor of the Children" [1,6,41,3] ante 202 A.D) ST. CYRIL OF JERUSALEM Since then He Himself has declared and said of the Bread, (This is My Body), who shall dare to doubt any longer? And since He has affirmed and said, (This is My Blood), who shall ever hesitate, saying, that it is not His blood?” ("Catechetical Lectures [22 (Mystagogic 4), 1] c. 350 A.D) ST. HILARY OF POITERS "When we speak of the reality of Christ's nature being in us, we would be speaking foolishly and impiously - had we not learned it from Him. For He Himself says: 'My Flesh is truly Food, and My Blood is truly Drink. He that eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood will remain in Me and I in him.' As to the reality of His Flesh and Blood, there is no room left for doubt, because now, both by the declaration of the Lord Himself and by our own faith, it is truly the Flesh and it is truly Blood. And These Elements bring it about, when taken and consumed, that we are in Christ and Christ is in us. Is this not true? Let those who deny that Jesus Christ is true God be free to find these things untrue. But He Himself is in us through the flesh and we are in Him, while that which we are with Him is in God." ("The Trinity" [8,14] inter 356-359 A.D.) ST. GREGORY OF NYSSA "The bread is at first common bread; but when the mystery sanctifies it, it is called and actually becomes the Body of Christ."("Orations and Sermons" [Jaeger Vol 9, pp. 225-226] ca. 383 A.D.) ST. AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO "You ought to know what you have received, what you are going to receive, and what you ought to receive daily. That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Body of Christ. The chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Blood of Christ." ("Sermons", [227, 21] ca. 400A.D.) MARCARIUS THE MAGNESIAN "[Christ] took the bread and the cup, each in a similar fashion, and said: 'This is My Body and this is My Blood.' Not a figure of His body nor a figure of His blood, as some persons of petrified mind are wont to rhapsodize, but in truth the Body and the Blood of Christ, seeing that His body is from the earth, and the bread and wine are likewise from the earth." ("Apocriticus" [3,23] ca. 400 A.D.) ST. LEO I, THE GREAT "When the Lord says: 'Unless you shall have eaten the flesh of the Son of Man and shall have drunk His blood, you shall not have life in you,' you ought to so communicate at the Sacred Table that you have no doubt whatever of the truth of the Body and the Blood of Christ. ("Sermons" [91,3] ante 461 A.D.) “Blessed rather are they who hear the word of God and keep it!” (Jesus Christ (Luke 11:28))

Yeah, that was not a fair treatment of Trent

Also not a fair and complete quote about forgiveness of sins either from Trent.

“If anyone says that the sacrifice of the mass is one only of praise and thanksgiving; or that it is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross but not a propitiatory one; or that it profits him only who receives, and ought not to be offered for the living and the dead, for sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA” (Canons on the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 3).

@user-nj1rc9hk4h yeah, I don't get what you have issue with. If you don't like anathema statements then ok, but that doesn't mean they are wrong.

@@jessebartunek3195 The canon is wrong because it goes against the words of holy scripture. Jesus said, "It is finished" on the cross; "once for all" (John 19:28-30, Romans 6:10, 1 Peter 3:18 and Hebrews 9:26)

We believe that valid is the ordination when the teaching is valid.

No biblical support for that doctrine at all.​@@user-nj1rc9hk4h

"Do this in memory of me." - Jesus

The Church has always taught that the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ. This doctrine is referred to as “The Real Presence.” Understandably this can be a hard teaching to accept. However, belief in the Real Presence rests upon the words of Christ Himself. In John 6:48-57 we read the following: I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread, will live forever, and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world. The Jews quarreled among themselves saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.” Opponents of the Real Presence contend that Jesus was speaking metaphorically. They say the words flesh and blood refer to Jesus’ teaching. And that it is devoured by the ear. But that is not possible. Jesus had already been dispensing such “bread” for the last two years. Concerning the bread spoken of in John 6, Jesus says in verse 51: “The bread that I will give is my flesh.” The word will, is future tense. So, the bread in John 6 is something other than that which He had already been giving. A year later at the Last Supper, Jesus fulfilled His promise: “While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, ‘Take and eat, this is My body.’ Then He took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it all of you, for this is My blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins'” (Matthew 26:26-28). Note that Jesus held the bread and the cup in His hands when He said, “This is my body,” and “This is my blood.” If I were holding a baby and I said: “This is my son.” No one would think I was speaking metaphorically. Likewise, when Jesus holds bread in His hands and says: “This is my body,” no one should think He was speaking metaphorically, particularly in light of His promise a year earlier. Also, read what happens in John 6:60 and 66, - “Then many of His disciples who were listening said, ‘This saying is hard, who can accept it?’…As a result of this, many [of] His disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied Him.” Why was it hard for Jesus’ disciples to accept something that was supposedly symbolic? Why would they abandon Him over it? Apparently, they took Him literally. If they were wrong, why didn’t He correct them? When Jesus taught something and it was not understood, He would explain it as He did with the parables. If His message was understood but rejected, He just repeated it with more force, as He did with the Pharisees. And that is exactly what He does in John 6. Between verses 48 and 59, He repeatedly makes the point that His flesh is true food and His blood is true drink. Paul affirms the Real Presence in 1 Corinthians 10:16 and 11:27-29. “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?… Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord…For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.” If the Lords body and blood are not present, how can a wrong be committed against them? Under the Old Covenant God commanded the Israelites to offer sacrifices to atone for their sins. One of the sin offerings was a lamb (Leviticus 5:1-6). The Old covenant prefigured the New Covenant. The sacrificial lamb of Leviticus is a type or picture of Christ. Jesus is the sacrificial Lamb of the New Covenant: “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). The Old Covenant lamb would be sacrificed and then a part of that sacrifice would be eaten to receive its benefits. (Leviticus 6:24-26). Likewise, Jesus, the New Covenant Lamb, would be sacrificed and His body would be eaten in order to receive its benefits: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, you do not have life within you” (John 6:53). After the resurrection God’s relationship with His people changed. In the Old Testament the Holy Spirit was given to a few select individuals. But in the New Testament the Holy Spirit is given to anyone who would ask (Luke 11:13). In the Old Testament God was present in a special way in the Holy of Holies. But only the High Priest could stand in His presence. In the New Testament God is present in a special way in the tabernacle. But now anyone can stand in His presence. And most importantly, anyone who is properly disposed can receive Him in a most personal way. The Early Church understood the nature and significance of the Eucharist. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch from the year 69 to 110, writes in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans: “But look at the men who have those perverted notions about the grace of Jesus Christ…They will not admit the Eucharist is the self-same body of our Savior Jesus Christ which suffered for our sins, and which the Father in His goodness afterwards raised up again” (7:1). A few decades later, around the year 150, Justin martyr wrote: “Not as common bread or common drink do we receive these, but since Jesus Christ our savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66). But why the Eucharist? Why couldn’t Jesus just strengthen us through prayer? Well, He can, and He does. However, we are physical and the world we live in is physical. The Eucharist is something we can see and touch and that makes it more relatable. Jesus came to earth physically. And He sacrificed His physical body to save us from our sins. Jesus is called the Word of God because he is the physical manifestation of the hidden reality (God). Likewise, the Eucharist is the physical manifestation of the now hidden Christ. Adoring a Jesus you can see is easier than adoring a Jesus you can’t see. I am not saying that it is a necessity, but it is an aid. St. Thomas Aquinas said as much in his Summa Theologica: Sacraments are necessary unto man’s salvation for three reasons. The first is taken from the condition of human nature which is such that it has to be led by things corporeal and sensible to things spiritual and intelligible. Now it belongs to Divine providence to provide for each one according as its condition requires. Divine wisdom, therefore, fittingly provides man with means of salvation, in the shape of corporeal and sensible signs that are called sacraments (3:61:1). I also believe that the Eucharist is a test of faith. It is easy to have faith in Jesus when he tells us to love our neighbor. But how about when He challenges us with something that is outside of our normal realm of experience? As we saw earlier, the Scriptures are quite clear when it comes to the Real Presence. The bread becomes Jesus body and the wine becomes His blood. The question is do we believe it? Jesus invited Peter to walk on water and he did (Matthew 14:22-29). He told Noah to build an ark to prepare for an event that was, to the natural mind, beyond the realm of possibility (Genesis 6:13-17). God told Abraham He would give him a son and then once he did, he asked him to sacrifice him on an altar (Genesis 22:1-14). Moses was asked to take on Pharaoh (Exodus 3:1-12), Mary was asked to have a virgin birth (Luke 1:26-35), and Elizabeth and Zechariah were told they would have a child even though she had been barren and they were both advanced in age (Luke 1:5-13). All were called to have faith in seemingly impossible situations. And we admire those who did. But what about us? When faced with a situation that seems to defy logic do we believe Jesus, or do we come up with our own plan like Sarah did (Genesis 15:1-6, 16:1-4)? To deny the Eucharist is to deny that God is capable of supernatural acts. The sacrament of the Eucharist is a gift from God. In the words of St. John Vianny: “Jesus Christ found a way by which He could ascend into Heaven and yet remain on earth. He instituted the adorable sacrament of the Eucharist so that He might stay with us and be our Companion.”

@@lidiaduplooy3385 Hi Lidia, Boy, you must have set a world record for a reply on RU-vid. I really wasn't questioning the Catholic (or Orthodox) view on the Real Presence but the LCMS view. Thanks again for all your work. Steve

Jesus was not really talking about the Lord's Supper when he said that. I'm sorry but my memory is failing me... Someone explained it to me but I'm not remembering. There was some other point he was making. Now I will lay awake tonight trying to remember

@@lidiaduplooy3385 Hello I tried to read it all, but its past my bed time so I had to skim it. Can I ask you something. First what you have claimed about Paul affirms in 1 Corinthians. If your son that you said "this is my son".. If your son went away. Could I not wrong your son from a distance? I could sneak in to his room when he is at school and rob his piggybank. Then when he came home... And reviewed the security camera. I would have to answer for the crimes I committed. No? Just a suggestion. If you were holding your son and said "this is my son". I agree... However. Why don't you apply your same logic to... If I did a thing and then said "do this in remembrance of me". Why would anyone think I meant any more than what I said? You say "this is my son" and it is your son. And. If Jesus said "do this in remembrance" then how is it not something done in remembrance? Like... Every year I have a "birthday" but I do not actually crawl back in to my mothers womb and be born again on my "birthday". The birthday is celebrated in remembrance of that one time when I did come out of my mothers womb. So.. Why do you get to pick and choose? And if "this is my son" means this is your son. Then what does "Who is my mother?" mean? Please looking forward to your informative answers. Thanks!

@@br.m in greek the word is ''ανάμνησις'' and does not mean the shallow english term ''remembrance''. It is a platonic word and means ''the object of my memory is here in blood and flesh''.

I do not agree with you. He rightly handles the roman catholic theology. He does not handle it with bad manner. I have deeply studied the roman catholic catechism. I was ready to be roman catholic, before I was converted to confessional lutheranism.

​@@user-nj1rc9hk4h Please read some of the teachings of the early Catholic/Orthodox Church fathers on the Eucharist and you will see none of them believed in Martin Luther's "in, with and under" theory ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH “the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead." ("Letter to the Smyrnaeans", paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.) "I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed." ("Letter to the Romans", paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D.) "Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons." (Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.) ST. JUSTIN MARTYR "This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God's Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus." ("First Apology", Ch. 66, inter A.D. 148-155) ST. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA "The Word is everything to a child: both Father and Mother, both Instructor and Nurse. 'Eat My Flesh,' He says, 'and drink My Blood.' The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients. He delivers over His Flesh, and pours out His Blood; and nothing is lacking for the growth of His children. O incredible mystery!" ("The Instructor of the Children" [1,6,41,3] ante 202 A.D) ST. CYRIL OF JERUSALEM Since then He Himself has declared and said of the Bread, (This is My Body), who shall dare to doubt any longer? And since He has affirmed and said, (This is My Blood), who shall ever hesitate, saying, that it is not His blood?” ("Catechetical Lectures [22 (Mystagogic 4), 1] c. 350 A.D) ST. HILARY OF POITERS "When we speak of the reality of Christ's nature being in us, we would be speaking foolishly and impiously - had we not learned it from Him. For He Himself says: 'My Flesh is truly Food, and My Blood is truly Drink. He that eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood will remain in Me and I in him.' As to the reality of His Flesh and Blood, there is no room left for doubt, because now, both by the declaration of the Lord Himself and by our own faith, it is truly the Flesh and it is truly Blood. And These Elements bring it about, when taken and consumed, that we are in Christ and Christ is in us. Is this not true? Let those who deny that Jesus Christ is true God be free to find these things untrue. But He Himself is in us through the flesh and we are in Him, while that which we are with Him is in God." ("The Trinity" [8,14] inter 356-359 A.D.) ST. GREGORY OF NYSSA "The bread is at first common bread; but when the mystery sanctifies it, it is called and actually becomes the Body of Christ."("Orations and Sermons" [Jaeger Vol 9, pp. 225-226] ca. 383 A.D.) ST. AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO "You ought to know what you have received, what you are going to receive, and what you ought to receive daily. That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Body of Christ. The chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Blood of Christ." ("Sermons", [227, 21] ca. 400A.D.) MARCARIUS THE MAGNESIAN "[Christ] took the bread and the cup, each in a similar fashion, and said: 'This is My Body and this is My Blood.' Not a figure of His body nor a figure of His blood, as some persons of petrified mind are wont to rhapsodize, but in truth the Body and the Blood of Christ, seeing that His body is from the earth, and the bread and wine are likewise from the earth." ("Apocriticus" [3,23] ca. 400 A.D.) ST. LEO I, THE GREAT "When the Lord says: 'Unless you shall have eaten the flesh of the Son of Man and shall have drunk His blood, you shall not have life in you,' you ought to so communicate at the Sacred Table that you have no doubt whatever of the truth of the Body and the Blood of Christ. ("Sermons" [91,3] ante 461 A.D.) “Blessed rather are they who hear the word of God and keep it!” (Jesus Christ (Luke 11:28)) God bless you

To be fair I am not so sure the EO follow the logic of transubstantiation but leave it up to mystery. Lutherans likewise leave it up to mystery. Roman Catholics maybe should have left it be and call it the body and blood without trying to rationalize it.