 | You scored as Luther. You are Martin Luther. You'll stick with the words of Scripture, and defend this with earthy expressions. You believe in an orthodox Christology. You believe that the bread and wine are the Body and Blood of Christ, but aren't too sure about where he goes after the meal, and so you don't accept reservation of the Blessed Sacrament or Eucharistic devotions.
Eucharistic theology created with QuizFarm.com |
The only thing about these quizzes is that I wish people who write them wouldn't be quite so cheeky about them. I like the ones where the results really expose the crap people believe...
Rick ended up slightly more RC than I did. I wonder why?
UPDATE: Link fixed. (Cat still fertile)
|
At 8/12/2006 04:16:00 PM, 
solarblogger
Well, if you and Kobra don't agree on Tombstone, you at least agree on the Lord's Supper.
I said "No" to "Jesus is present 'in, with, and under' the bread and wine only during the meal." because it's receptionism. That is, while I affirm that apart from the use there is no Sacrament, I think that our guys said that because they didn't believe we should consecrate and then fail to celebrate. They did not, however, think they could determine when the Real Presence ended. (I don't think He goes back to heaven when I return to my pew.)
I said yes to "You receive the complete Jesus, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, eating either species." I don't think it's a good way to talk, but I think you could argue for it.
I said no to "Jesus called it his body, and I'd believe him even if was pointing to shit." because I'm not willing to commit to eating shit on the basis of an ungrammatical sentence (or most grammatical ones). Also, the "pointing to" idea sounds like Karlstadt.
Track with co.mments