 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Eucharistic theology created with QuizFarm.com |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
You scored as OrthodoxYou are Orthodox, worshiping the mystery of the Holy Trinity in the great liturgy whereby Jesus is present through the Spirit in a real yet mysterious way, a meal that is also a sacrifice.
|
H/t Dean Knisely
I doubt these results come as a surprise to most who know me. Conflicts between my own understanding of the Eucharist, how I read the first generation of Lutheran Reformers, and the theology of the contemporary Lutheran church were my first signs that I needed to reconsider whether God was calling me to be a Lutheran pastor.
Hmmm… an interesting discussion starter. I did the quiz but kept wanting to say well it’s both and not just either or…
eg. the priest transforms it, and God transforms it, and the people’s praying led by the priest,and the Holy Spirit,… [so how do I put agree or disagree…]
Bosco
http://www.liturgy.co.nz
http://www.liturgy.co.nz
Absolutely! And likewise Christ *must* be there spiritually because he’s there physically, etc.
I think that’s how I got the Zwinglian points…
I scored Orthodox, but given the name of my blog, that’s no surprise. Spong is the defacto official theologian at my parish, so I’ve got my work cut out.
Me too! 100% Orthodox, 75% Lutheran etc. I think my RC score was low because of my disdain for carrying the elements about to be adored and other such questions.
What makes me happiest is that there is still no hint of Zwingli in my score!
No surprises here. I suspect that I scored lower on Catholic, because they asked a question straight from the Articles… This quiz mocks Unitarians in a big way…
Orthodox
94%
Luther
81%
Catholic
69%
Calvin
63%
Zwingli
25%
Unitarian
0%
Thanks for stopping by, Joe!
I’m seeing a definite pattern here… Most of the Anglicans are coming up as Orthodox with Lutheran and Catholic rounding out the top three and in interchangeable order.
Except Christopher.
And then there’s LP…
I think it’s how the questions are worded.
Derek,
It’s because the understanding of “spiritually” in Eucharistic questions usually means one of two things, and hence, my ears prick up when I hear those words: Zwingli means by this term that we remember in our minds and are brought back to Christ on the Cross and in Calvin/Bucer/Cranmer?(for Cranmer is a tricky man and may be as much Zwinglian and “Phillippist” or extra Calvinisticum) means we’re taken to Christ (whose body is locateable only at the right hand of the Father) by the Holy Spirit and there receive a blessing and at the same time are fed internally by grace. I don’t buy it, being a Real Presence to the max kind of thinker–that the gospel, Jesus Christ, body, soul, and all is present to us fully in receiving and changes us body, soul, and all.
Also, like LP, I’m hesitant about the carrying the elements about to be adored and other such questions. The history of the reserved sacrament is interesting; it’s purpose began naturally in folks taking communion to those who couldn’t make it because of work or illness. Nathan Mitchell’s work on the matter from a Roman Catholic perspective is perhaps best. I guess I’m primarily for the Supper is for eating kind of school.
Christopher,
Yeah, but… If that’s the case, when do you ever get to sing the Tantum Ergo?
;-)
Derek,
This is because “spiritually” always pricks my ears. It usually means one of two things. In Zwingli this tends to mean we’re taken back to the Cross on Calvary and remember in our minds. In Calvin/Bucer/Cranmer? (for Cranmer is a tricky man), we are taken to Jesus (whose body is human and thus finite and therefore at the right hand of God) and receive a blessing and at the same time are given grace internally/in our souls. Being a Real Presence to the max person, I understand we receive Christ, body, soul, and all and we are changed body, soul, and all in receiving. “spiritually” most often in discussions of the sacrament has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit or Christ’s spirit.
I’m also hesitant about lifting up the sacrament rather than primarily for eating. The history of the reserved sacrament is located in folks taking communion to those who were working or sick. Musings on the nature of Christ’s continued Presence resulted in part from doing this. Nathan Mitchell’s treatment of this is perhaps the best from a Roman Catholic perspective. I’m also not sure I buy the metaphysical explanations as necessary to understand Christ’s Presence.
Oops, sorry, I thought the post was lost and had to retype.
Now wait a minute. Wasn’t the 11th century the cut off point. Anything after is innovation ;)
Hey–I’m becoming more open to contemporary music… :-D
I guess Eine Feste Burg is down right pomo :)
How a guy who loves “Hodie Christus Natus Est” can at the same time be a NIN fan is truly beyond me….
(Not really. I just don’t like metal, myself, but there’s truly no accounting for musical taste…. ;-) )
Well, I’m a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma that likes to head-bang to Latin… :-D
You people are bigger sacristy rats than I am. Frightening. But no true-blue Anglo-Catholic would ever let anything stand in the way of Benediction. The business in the Articles about not carrying things about must refer to something else, right?
Actually, I was just saying I wasn’t a sacristy rat.
I think it’s different when laypeople hang around together, isn’t it? Maybe we need a new category….
;)
Joe Rawls–
If I were feeling like casuitry today, I think I would argue that that particular Article of Religion is very much timebound in an era when most communicated twice per year, and thus the Blessed Sacrament became an ikon entire as opposed to food for the Body. And thus Benediction can be justified in a ecclesial culture in which the Sacrament is being put to use with sufficient frequency.
Unfortunately, I suspect the Articulators would consider Benediction a form of idolatry. This is Reason #XXX, I’m a High Churchman, not an Anglo-Catholic.
I took this twice because I lost the page in trying to copy code for my blog (still hasn’t worked).
FYI I am Independent Catholic clergy, following a long time RC and then some time TEC.
First time was 100% Orthodox and 94% Catholic, probably because I gave such unqualified endorsement to the HS transforming the elements and to divinization, while doing a midrange on reserving and carrying about the Blessed Sacrament (all for it but Christ didn’t institute it primarily for that reason of course). The second time reversed those proportions because of small alterations in proportion of agreement a few places, I think, and is probably more representative of my theology/spirituality.
Many thanks, Derek. I played and am happy with the result!
‘You scored as a Catholic…’
Orthodox and Roman tied at 100 per cent with Lutheran a distant third at 69 per cent…
Then… how’d these happen? Calvinist, 50 per cent; Zwinglian, 25 per cent and Unitarian, 6 per cent.
You might be interested to know that for me the quiz had a go at a tie-breaker by generating a choice between ‘the hosts are properly reserved in the Tabernacle and adored’ and ‘the Holy Spirit brings about the presence of Christ’ which of course are not mutually exclusive!
I wondered what they were fishing for with those ‘spiritual presence’ questions as I agree with Bosco Peters and Derek on those.
As for ‘it was instituted to be eaten and drunk not carried about’ from the Articles of course that’s a red herring. As a priest put it to me 22 years ago neither did Christ institute Morning Prayer in surplice, hood and scarf which doesn’t mean those are bad things.
The young fogey, logged into a WordPress account so my avatar shows up in these blogs.
very interesting, but I don’t agree with you
Idetrorce