[kosta50]

I could VERY well be wrong about this, but I have a vague memory from the L&E thread that the Orthodox don't agree with "something" about Transubstantiation, but I can't remember what it is

Inasmuch as it means "Real Presence," i.e. True Body and True Blood of our Lord and Savior,it is in full agreement with Orthodoxy.

Eastern Orthodox, however, do not attempt to "explain" how God's Mysteries (Sacraments) happen.

In Eastern Orthodoxy, the priest asks the Holy Spirit to intercede and change mysteriously the blessed bread and wine into Body and Blood (epiklesis). In the Catholic Church, the epiklesis is invoked, but is less prominent, because the change is mediated by the priest, acting in the place of Christ.

With that we do not agree. Both traditions have always maintained the Real Presence, but the theory of transubstantiation is alien to Orthodox phronema (mindset).

[Wallace T.]

Would it be fair to say, however, that Eastern Orthodoxy would recognize the Eucharist in the Roman Catholic Church as valid due to its acceptance of the doctrine of apostolic succession and the issue of proper ordination?

Lutheranism's doctrine of the sacrament is one of the Real Presence, but they define it as "consubstantiation" (the elements are simultaneously the body and blood of Christ and bread and wine) rather than transubstantiation (the elements become the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ although retaining the outward appearance of bread and wine). However, Lutheranism does not have the historic episcopate. As a result, would the Lutheran sacrament be held as invalid by Eastern Orthodoxy?

I assume the Calvinist position (spiritual presence only) and the Zwinglian one (memorial and symbolic only) would be rejected by Eastern Orthodoxy as invalid. Is my assumption correct?

[Kolokotronis]

FK, I concur with Kosta here and with Alex at 590.

[Forest Keeper]

Both traditions have always maintained the Real Presence, but the theory of transubstantiation is alien to Orthodox phronema (mindset).

Thanks for the clarification. What you said was exactly the type of distinction I thought I remembered.