The Evangelical Universalist Forum



Well, what is your position regarding Martin Luther?


Since I am a member of the Orthodox Church, Martin Luther is not an authority for me. That said, I prefer him to any of the other 16th-century Reformation figures. I admire him sticking to his guns regarding “This is my body” at the Marburg Colloquy in 1529.

If God Himself were to tell me that I needed to join a Protestant denomination of my choosing, I would join an old-fashioned Lutheran church.


Following in the Holy Fools tradition, I would probably join one from this article:

12 Bizarre Church Names


Randy, whose views on communion do you subscribe to, Lutherans or Methodists?


Here’s what I don’t subscribe to:

A chemistry professor trying to explain communion, in terms of modern chemistry.
Some friend or relative saying we should **remember **them, when they are no longer with us, every time we eat bread and drink wine.

Let’s discuss the positions a bit more:

I don’t subscribe to the Roman Catholic view of Transubstantiation (.i.e. - Wiki:

I also don’t agree with the typical Protestant view, in that communion is preformed as a remembrance. Once a Lutheran theologian told me, that the Greek word for remembrance, which is the same as that for sacrifice. Perhaps those who know Greek on this forum - can confirm that?
My view is the same, as the Eastern Orthodox. Christ is present in the bread and wine. But it is a divine mystery, how it is so. This also appears to be the United Methodist position at Do United Methodists believe the communion elements actually become the body and blood of Christ?:

The views of major Christian groups on communion, is summarized at Five views of the Eucharist:. I’ll just quote the Eastern Orthodox view, which I side with - along with the stated Methodist response:

But the Lutheran view of Consubstantiation (i.e. - Wiki:

, is one I prefer to the Roman Catholic view. Or as the article Five views of the Eucharist: says:

But I still feel it’s trying to put communion, into the scientific terms of modern chemistry (although less so, then Roman Catholicism). I prefer the Eastern Orthodox and United Methodist positions - on this matter. Here’s some tidbits from the Eastern Orthodox at Holy Eucharist


Hi, qaz. Since I’ve shared my views with you, in a prior post - what are **your **views on communion?


I honestly don’t know. It might “just” be a symbolic, solemn act of remembrance -or- Jesus Christ might literally be in the bread and wine. I’m torn on the issue. :frowning:. Of course, the latter view brings up the question of omnipresence.


Only if you try to fit it into the mode of western philosophy. Rather then leaving it as Eastern Orthodox divine mystery or United Methodist unexplainable. Otherwise, you might be doing this. :exclamation: :laughing:


Note to the non-tech folks: Since bandwidth actually comes from Google’s YouTube, it really makes no difference whether you embed the video or provide an external link. I do both so folks can choose. :exclamation: :smiley:


We look at these things , as you say, from our view (western philosophy), our paradigm, but the real enlightening thing is to look at these ideas from a different point of view, thus many of these ideas can be perceived as open doors, and not dead ends. Let’s not stop with western philosophy, or eastern otho, catholic rhetoric, or even, for many and Lord forbid, protestant teaching. :open_mouth:

Communion is what it is to you. I personally go to a church that has not partaken in communion for the last five years. You can line up against this stand, but we see no need to do communion just to do it. My communion is my own time with Christ, and so it is with our church. We will not do it just because someone else says we need to. We are worshiping and progressing in our understanding of what Christ has done.

It is kind of interesting, and I hope it will open up some possible questions. :sunglasses:


Maintenanceman, what do you think it means when Paul says it’s possible to take communion unworthily?


Actually, that is a really good point, as I and the people I worship with, think it may be better to not do communion as a congregation , but rather each one in his or her own… and I do understand the gravitation to the need to do it in a corporate setting, but your note is worthy of consideration. To be honest, qaz, we (the folks I worship with) do not know enough about this to make it a priority… We simply do our best but we do regard what you point out Paul says in a some what serious matter, so, :confused: So our position is to keep on going like we’re going. We are a totally nondenominational small rural church. But we do have GOOD WORSHIP :laughing:

I hope that makes sense… :question:


Well, Chad, I attended Quaker meetings, for many years also. And they certainly don’t practice communion. And I went to grade school, in the Lutheran Church - Missouri synod. They practice closed communion. Now I am Anglo-Catholic. I think if a person is a **member **of a particular church, then they should be on board with that Church’s stance on communion. So if someone joins the Evangelical Lutheran Church or United Methodist Church, they should be in accordance - with that church’s position on communion.

Having said that, in the thread discussing a theological deterministic model, I did present my theological position. And I did say if someone didn’t like mine, then pick another one from this forum. Or one from the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox or Protestant denomination. Or their favorite Bible Church, Community Church or TV evangelist. :smiley:

My preference is that someone chooses a theological and/or philosophical position,from one that has an historical and/or contemporary antecedent. Rather then the garden variety RYO “roll your own” position. :laughing:


Randy, the church I attended was UMC. How would you describe their communion stance (aside from “open”). Also, are UMC okay with universalists?


Randy said:

I have no problem with the idea of choosing a position based on your criteria, it’s the baggage that comes with the multitude of positions that gets kind of stinky. Besides, todays ‘roll your own’, might well be mainstream in a generation or two :exclamation: :laughing:


To the "Besides, todays ‘roll your own’, might well be mainstream in a generation or two’, I only add this bible verse.

To the " it’s the baggage that comes with the multitude of positions that gets kind of stinky.", a picture is worth a thousand words" :exclamation: :laughing: .


uh oh, I’m a *stinking *liar :open_mouth:

Matthew 18:20 :smiley:

Peace :wink:


Only if, when you put two and two together, the result is five. :exclamation: :laughing:


Don’t we all make our choices of how to understand God? Even when we choose a tradition, we are choosing a tradition - maybe not rolling our own, but choosing one that has been pre-rolled to our taste; and once we are a part of it, we continue to grow, and even within the tradition we may have our reservations about certain facets.

And, as soon as we choose one of the pre-rolled traditions, we are implicitly (at least) saying that the other choices are not to our taste OR that they are wrong in something fundamental.

We do choose what to believe, and how to hold that belief, and the ‘style’ with which to express it. ‘Sola Scriptura’? - that is your choice. The Magesterium? Your choice. The Liturgy? Your choice.

It should humble us a bit, and teach us to understand and love, rather than shooting at one another. (of which I have been guilty :blush: )

A good-natured brotherly squabble is fun, though! :laughing:


The only time we should shoot at each other, is if someone laughs at our mule. The mule just doesn’t understand. :exclamation: :laughing:


It would be interesting to see some data about how folks choose which church or denomination they will worship with. In my experience, it seems many people make the choice based on how they ‘feel’ about the others that are currently going to said church. I would guess, fellowship might be as important as theology to many :exclamation: