Replies

It is not mere hair splitting. Despite the claim of sola scriptura of relying only on the plain words of scripture, the theory of consubstantiation arose from a lack of faith in the simple words of our Lord. It was an attempt to rationalize what seemed contradictory to human reason. It was also a denial of the teaching authority of the Church. It might have been a valid concept before the Church defined it, but transubstantiation was taught (though not by name) by the early Fathers and declared doctrine 300 years before Martin Luther. One of the results of the theory of consubstantiation was doubt concerning the abiding or continuing presence of the Body and Blood of our Lord in the reserved Sacrament. I believe that some Lutherans would say "yes" and others "no".

One of the results of the theory of consubstantiation was doubt concerning the abiding or continuing presence of the Body and Blood of our Lord in the reserved Sacrament. I believe that some Lutherans would say "yes" and others "no".

Thanks for the info. I could have sworn the LCMS believed in transubstantiation, not consubstantiation, but I might be wrong. I was very young then and can't remember. Wish I still had my Lutheran catechism. Could go on-line, but that would be the modern version, not what was in existence when I was growing up.