Hearing Melancthon talk about how the Eucharist is celebrated every Lord's day, and other festivals, makes me a little sad that my church doesn't celebrate it weekly, and that we don't do the full liturgy.
@@gagegarlinghouse258 it's definitely nice to celebrate often. We do it almost every service. During Lent even on Wednesdays. It is a great way to both end things, and start anew, at the same time. If it's practical perhaps you could make known your desire.
@@gagegarlinghouse258 I have heard that some LCMS congregations have gone astray. If using their own form of liturgy and neglecting the Supper is all they have done, God has blessed you. LCMS should be stricter about making congregations adhere to Synod standards or call themselves something else.
Interesting to hear this Lutheran perspective. I also find the eucharistic prayers of Mari and Addai very beautiful (by the way they are largely preserved in the Chaldean Catholic rite and I believe the Maronite rite ). You might find Father Louis Bouyer's tome "Eucharist" (about 474 pages) of interest as it goes into great detail of the development of liturgies and especially the eucharistic prayers of various types. Much time is spent on Mari and Addai, the controversial liturgy of Hippolytus(he gives his theory of its provenance) , the Alexandrian family of liturgies, the Roman Canon and others. It was largely written by 1966 with some concluding chapters in 1968 reflecting his own work in the Consilium that reformed the Catholic Mass. As far as I can tell, the scholarship is still well respected and largely holds up(it was in some ways ahead of its time in thoughts on Hippolytus as well as the Roman Canon). In 1968 he had rather rose colored glasses about the V2 reforms but later was rather critical of some of their deficiencies (detailed in his memoirs published after his death). He belonged to neither the very Traditional/Neoscholastic Roman Curia faction nor the extremely liberal Kung/ Schillebeeckx faction, but joined forces in the 1970's with the more conservative reformers who broke with them - Ratzinger, De Lubac, and some others. Interestingly he was a convert from Lutheranism (converted in late 1930's if I recall). A massive intellect and respected theologian.
Hello Dr, I am Lutheran from East Africa Ethiopia, You know I have lack of books specially Lutheran Theological books, if you have any hard copy book please help me, our bank system could not allow to purchase online, Blessing
One way we could see the Elevation is that with the means God has given as gifts (bread and wine), we lift them up in thanksgiving. But then these offerings of praise come down changed into greater forms, the Body and Blood of the Crucified, coming down from Heaven as pure gift to us redeemed sinners. Just a thought, not sure if any theologians have spoken this way about it. (Not saying we need to necessarily tie the consecration to the moment of elevation)
Yes, the elevation is the offering up to God of the bread and wine (alms) for Him to hallow and consecrate through the liturgical action of the Church's celebration. This has roots in Jewish manual gestures denoting the object of sacrifice (laying hands on the lambs, ordination etc) -- the elevation is in the same category as making the sign of the cross. It is only with late medieval theories of "sacramental moment" brought on from an over-emphasis on the magical power of the verba divorced from the sacramental action as such (including the role of the verba within the eucharistic prayer), that the elevation takes on the connotation of offering up Christ to the Father... these assumptions were in many ways simply brought into Lutheranism without question, though of course re-tooled, and the elevation was thus reinterpreted as _adoration_ rather than _oblation_ as a result of the new understanding of sacramental moment.
@@poordoubloon10 the problem is that you are adding on a superficial interpretation to an action that has nothing to do with it. The elevation in liturgy began in France in the 12th century, explicitly as a sacrificial medieval Catholic connotation. Trying to tack on your own interpretation is just historical inaccuracy.
I have the habit in my prayers during the week to think of the Eucharist and say something like “Lord, help me to be faithful to your Body and Blood, keep me from sin, that I may commune this coming Sunday worthily.” Is this a confusion of the passive-active nature of the Sacrament? Do you think there’s a danger here of turning the Gospel element into Law by turning the Sacrament into something based on my “not sinning” before communing?
It is good to pray that you will not offend God (sin), but the fact of our condition is that you will sin before you receive next Sunday. The Eucharist is always preceded buy confession of sin and absolution.
Is it possible to put the titles of any of the books you read from in the description? Sometimes I have a bit of trouble getting them. If that is too much on top of everything else you also do (which is a lot!), I definitely get it. God's peace.
I think Zwingly Criticism against the Luther was valid. He criticized that Jesus is fully God Fully Man the hypostatic union. His divine Attributes are within his divine nature, and his human attributes he assumed at incarnation. So as pentecostal i hold a Spiritual View, Partaking Viewers. And most importantly That we take it in commemoration of The New Convenant and our Lord. However as i dive into Church Fathers i think i might adopt Lutheran consubstation. I'm kinda agnostic on this view. But im definitely not going to hold transubstantiation any time soon
The word "consubstantiation" implies that we understand the mystery. Lutherans reject the word because we don't. There is a real presence of both bread and Christ's body, both wine and Christ's blood.
It may be helpful when having a spiritual view to also see communion as a real part of unity for those who are partaking of the elements. The elements are a physical link not only through each eating and drinking together but also they unite us to Christ in the eating and drinking.
Jesus is fully God and fully man ALL THE TIME. He is eternally God, the second person of the Trinity. He became man with His incarnation but did not give up His divinity, he only masked part of his omniscience from Himself for a time. After His Resurrection He appeared in a locked room and ate fish. Both God and man.
@@markhorton3994 the idea that Christ is physically present i my point. I may or may not accept. All i know is Christ is present. But how is he Present is the question.
Can Mt Roman Catholic friends and brothers please get together with my Eastern Orthodox Brothers and my Oriental Orthodox Brothers and please unconfuse me as to which church I should convert to join the "true" Church? Your friendly Independent Lutheran in NZ. PS shoutout to the Serbian Orthodox guys for giving me a vaxx free, mask free, yes to fellowship after service Experience while I was banned from my old church during government suppression of unvaxxed people.
Hearing Melancthon talk about how the Eucharist is celebrated every Lord's day, and other festivals, makes me a little sad that my church doesn't celebrate it weekly, and that we don't do the full liturgy.
What denomination is that?
@@MortenBendiksen It's in my LCMS church
@@gagegarlinghouse258 it's definitely nice to celebrate often. We do it almost every service. During Lent even on Wednesdays. It is a great way to both end things, and start anew, at the same time. If it's practical perhaps you could make known your desire.
@@gagegarlinghouse258 I have heard that some LCMS congregations have gone astray. If using their own form of liturgy and neglecting the Supper is all they have done, God has blessed you. LCMS should be stricter about making congregations adhere to Synod standards or call themselves something else.
@@gagegarlinghouse258do Lutherans use the host like Catholics or do they use actual bread? And is it unleavened?
Good work Dr. Coop. These last 3 presentations on the Eucharist have been enjoyable.
A very good lecture
Please find a way to publish that book on Lutheran Liturgy... before it's lost. Put us on the wait list!
Interesting to hear this Lutheran perspective. I also find the eucharistic prayers of Mari and Addai very beautiful (by the way they are largely preserved in the Chaldean Catholic rite and I believe the Maronite rite ). You might find Father Louis Bouyer's tome "Eucharist" (about 474 pages) of interest as it goes into great detail of the development of liturgies and especially the eucharistic prayers of various types. Much time is spent on Mari and Addai, the controversial liturgy of Hippolytus(he gives his theory of its provenance) , the Alexandrian family of liturgies, the Roman Canon and others. It was largely written by 1966 with some concluding chapters in 1968 reflecting his own work in the Consilium that reformed the Catholic Mass. As far as I can tell, the scholarship is still well respected and largely holds up(it was in some ways ahead of its time in thoughts on Hippolytus as well as the Roman Canon). In 1968 he had rather rose colored glasses about the V2 reforms but later was rather critical of some of their deficiencies (detailed in his memoirs published after his death). He belonged to neither the very Traditional/Neoscholastic Roman Curia faction nor the extremely liberal Kung/ Schillebeeckx faction, but joined forces in the 1970's with the more conservative reformers who broke with them - Ratzinger, De Lubac, and some others. Interestingly he was a convert from Lutheranism (converted in late 1930's if I recall). A massive intellect and respected theologian.
Hello Dr, I am Lutheran from East Africa Ethiopia, You know I have lack of books specially Lutheran Theological books, if you have any hard copy book please help me, our bank system could not allow to purchase online,
Blessing
@27:00- That is probably one of the most egregious problems with Rome’s presentation of the gospel: Christ’s atonement doesn’t cover all sins.
did you stop the video ? Because your point is refuted at 27:05. Literally 5 seconds later
Getting those books back in print 👏🏻
One way we could see the Elevation is that with the means God has given as gifts (bread and wine), we lift them up in thanksgiving. But then these offerings of praise come down changed into greater forms, the Body and Blood of the Crucified, coming down from Heaven as pure gift to us redeemed sinners. Just a thought, not sure if any theologians have spoken this way about it.
(Not saying we need to necessarily tie the consecration to the moment of elevation)
Yes, the elevation is the offering up to God of the bread and wine (alms) for Him to hallow and consecrate through the liturgical action of the Church's celebration. This has roots in Jewish manual gestures denoting the object of sacrifice (laying hands on the lambs, ordination etc) -- the elevation is in the same category as making the sign of the cross.
It is only with late medieval theories of "sacramental moment" brought on from an over-emphasis on the magical power of the verba divorced from the sacramental action as such (including the role of the verba within the eucharistic prayer), that the elevation takes on the connotation of offering up Christ to the Father... these assumptions were in many ways simply brought into Lutheranism without question, though of course re-tooled, and the elevation was thus reinterpreted as _adoration_ rather than _oblation_ as a result of the new understanding of sacramental moment.
@@poordoubloon10 the problem is that you are adding on a superficial interpretation to an action that has nothing to do with it. The elevation in liturgy began in France in the 12th century, explicitly as a sacrificial medieval Catholic connotation. Trying to tack on your own interpretation is just historical inaccuracy.
I have the habit in my prayers during the week to think of the Eucharist and say something like “Lord, help me to be faithful to your Body and Blood, keep me from sin, that I may commune this coming Sunday worthily.” Is this a confusion of the passive-active nature of the Sacrament? Do you think there’s a danger here of turning the Gospel element into Law by turning the Sacrament into something based on my “not sinning” before communing?
I wouldn't think so. I think the far bigger danger is in many Christians taking it flippantly
It is good to pray that you will not offend God (sin), but the fact of our condition is that you will sin before you receive next Sunday. The Eucharist is always preceded buy confession of sin and absolution.
Is it possible to put the titles of any of the books you read from in the description? Sometimes I have a bit of trouble getting them.
If that is too much on top of everything else you also do (which is a lot!), I definitely get it. God's peace.
I second that
Amen about getting Reed back in print! But now that we have the LSB Companion to the Services, there is a new gold standard in town...
Hebrews 10:10
"By the which will we are sanctified through offering of the body of Jesus Christ once and for all."
I thought Rome believed Lutherans didn’t have the real presence?
roman slander
See the preceding two videos for a more direct treatment.
My Lutheran family has decided to sacrifice me. Please explain
I think Zwingly Criticism against the Luther was valid. He criticized that Jesus is fully God Fully Man the hypostatic union. His divine Attributes are within his divine nature, and his human attributes he assumed at incarnation.
So as pentecostal i hold a Spiritual View, Partaking Viewers. And most importantly That we take it in commemoration of The New Convenant and our Lord.
However as i dive into Church Fathers i think i might adopt Lutheran consubstation. I'm kinda agnostic on this view.
But im definitely not going to hold transubstantiation any time soon
The word "consubstantiation" implies that we understand the mystery. Lutherans reject the word because we don't.
There is a real presence of both bread and Christ's body, both wine and Christ's blood.
It may be helpful when having a spiritual view to also see communion as a real part of unity for those who are partaking of the elements. The elements are a physical link not only through each eating and drinking together but also they unite us to Christ in the eating and drinking.
Jesus is fully God and fully man ALL THE TIME. He is eternally God, the second person of the Trinity. He became man with His incarnation but did not give up His divinity, he only masked part of his omniscience from Himself for a time.
After His Resurrection He appeared in a locked room and ate fish. Both God and man.
@@markhorton3994 Amen
@@markhorton3994 the idea that Christ is physically present i my point. I may or may not accept. All i know is Christ is present.
But how is he Present is the question.
They put me on gangstalking list. Sick!
Nice guy, I hope and pray that Lutherans can unite with the historical church one day.
Or Roman Catholics will put down their unbiblical ways and unite with the one true church.
Which one? ;)
Can Mt Roman Catholic friends and brothers please get together with my Eastern Orthodox Brothers and my Oriental Orthodox Brothers and please unconfuse me as to which church I should convert to join the "true" Church? Your friendly Independent Lutheran in NZ. PS shoutout to the Serbian Orthodox guys for giving me a vaxx free, mask free, yes to fellowship after service Experience while I was banned from my old church during government suppression of unvaxxed people.
Yep. Until Rome repents of its errors there can be no unity. Rome teaches another gospel that is not in line with the Scriptures.
Trad or Orthobro?
Imaging studying and knowing as much as cooper, just to be a Lutheran....yikes
What a stupid and disrespectful comment.
Imagine thinking that just because someone studies they will arrive at the same opinion as you…. Yikes
@bejamen14 ah yes the christian subjective truth claims a classic