What is the Lutheran position on communion and consubstantiation?

EPISODE #27: Ted asks about what Lutherans believe about communion and consubstantiation. Rod talks about what Lutherans believe communion is and what it does and what it gives us, and how the Lutheran position differs from some other denominations.
SHOW NOTES:
Support the show - www.1517.org/d...
Subscribe to the podcast now on your favorite podcast software:
podcasts.apple...
podcasts.googl...
===
/ talkswithdadrod
/ talkswithdadrod
/ talkswithdadrod

[@arthur6157]

A concise and simple explanation. Thank you "Dad" Rod and Ted. I don't know why Lutherans are so shy about giving their understanding of the sacraments. In the case of the elements of the Supper, it must be over the communication of the attributes of Christ's divine nature to his human nature, which as stated IS heresy according to the creeds. I think you should take your own (good, IMO) advice and chalk it up to mystery and not let yourselves be drawn into a discussion of how our Lord's body and blood can be present in more than one location at one time if you're going to use the communication of attributes as the explanation. I hope that explanation is not a strawman of your position as it sounded like you might think it is. It's not necessary that we understand how a particular passage of Scripture is true as long as we trust that in some real sense it IS true. As a Presbyterian, we do speak of the sacraments, but sometimes I feel as though we can drift toward thinking of them as merely Reformed Baptist type ordinances if we're not careful. That's not right. They ARE ordinances, but they aren't MERELY ordinances. It certainly cannot be illegitimate to speak of the sacraments and their elements as Christ himself and his apostles spoke of them. They certainly do connect us by faith in some way to what they represent and to what they promise. They certainly are sensible signs of invisible forgiveness of sins and spiritual nourishment unto life everlasting by faith. They are the visible word, and in particular, the visible Gospel. That is certainly what the Lord intended and promised they would do by faith. The "by faith" part is, of course, key (I Cor. 10:1-4 with Heb. 3:12-4:2). As I understand the elements of the Supper, they are the body and blood of our Lord by faith in the same sense and by the same means as the Church is the body of Christ. I don't think it's an accident that we have two "body of Christ" "metaphors" given to us in Scripture by the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is omnipresent and is called "the Spirit of Christ" in Scripture. That which the Spirit of Christ indwells (any particular matter) is, by definition, the body of Christ. But I'm sure you guys will disagree, not about the Holy Spirit's omnipresence, but over in what sense and by what means the bread and wine are the true body and blood of the Lord. That's a shame. That being said, I want to say that you are right to personally trust what Scripture says and promises in and about the sacraments. My best to "Dad" Rod and Ted, and to separated Lutheran brethren, and thanks again for the clear explanation of your thinking on the subject.

[@Mygoalwogel]

"There are times we shouldn't speak and let the others go at it." -- Dr. Rod Rosenbladt

[@TheBlackToedOne]

Amen! Even in the bible it says basically better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it and remove all doubt.

[@howardbabcom]

The genuine beauty of truth - we deal with mystery!

[@jasongoodson7035]

I heard a guy say one time that Jesus wrote a check with his life, and on the 3rd day it cleared!

[@brandenburg2388]

I would put it this way instead. The check cleared on the 1st day itself, and on the 3rd day your bank sent you an acknowledgement of the successful transaction....

[@jgeph2.4]

What’s in the mug ? Root beer or Stout ?😋

[@tedrosenbladt9976]

@Jamie Gallagher It depends on the day. Often these days it's just coffee. But I do not shy away from Maker's Mark bourbon (for which I am an ambassador), or a good stout or IPA. Delicious!

[@RobertEWaters]

Consubstantiation, like transubstantiation, is an Aristotelean philosophical concept. God isn't and Luther wasn't, an Aristotelean philosopher. Nor a Platonist like Calvin.

[@j_deo]

That's right...he was a nominalist. he did not really believe in substances and so why defend them?

[@markster136]

So there is almost no difference from the Roman Catholic view. Almost nothing. Flame just did a video on commuion where he says it is the Gospel. Jesus died once. So we have a big problem here.After 13 years I guess I am no longer a Lutheran.

[@findev6330]

Martin Luther initially believed it was a offering but he later changed his thinking, “Even so we must let the words of Christ remain, and speak of the sacraments in suis terminis, (in their terms) with such words as Christ used and spake; as “Do this,” must not be turned into “Offer this;” … (p532, Table Talk ) “What signifies it to dispute and wrangle about the abominable idolatry of elevating the sacrament on high to show it to the people, which has no approbation of the Fathers, and was introduced only to confirm the errors touching the worship thereof, as though bread and wine lost their substance, and retained only the form, smell, taste. This the papists call transubstantiation, and darken the right use of the sacrament; whereas, even in popedom, at Milan, from Ambrose’s time to the present day, they never held or observed in the mass either canon or elevation, or the Dominus vobiscum. (The Lord be with you)”(Table Talk P. 227) Henry Bell’s testimony regarding the House of Commons decision to print “Table Talk” in English “Whereupon they made report, dated the 10th of November, 1646, that they found it to be an excellent divine work, worthy the light and publishing, especially in regard that Luther, in the said Discourses, did revoke his opinion which he formerly held, touching Consubstantiation in the Sacrament. Whereupon the House of Commons, the 24th of February, 1646, did give order for the printing thereof. Given under my hand the third day of July, 1650. -Henry Bell” This book called Table Talk was banned by the Catholic Church, punishable by death. Every single Protestant on the planet should read that book, this book is where his friends and colleagues wrote down what Martin Luther had to say around the table when he was not constrained by formal circumstances. So what came out of his mouth is what he actually felt and believed.