A catholic in protestant worship

[NoWhereMan]

Well, the Lutherans and Anglicans have at least something called the Eucharist
EDIT: Missed Tristan’s post when I first wrote this… the Lutheran and Anglicans do have something called the Eucharist, as I said, but it doesn’t actually become the Body and Blood outside of the Church.

Catholics say that our Eucharist is the real presense, other churches cannot claim this . Catholic priests have the power to change bread & wine into the body & Blood of Jesus, called the transubstanciation

 

[Newbie2]

What about the Lutheran Eucharist? It is greatly exhorted in Luther’s Small Catechism that the Eucharist the literal Body and Blood of Christ.

But not in a transubstantiated way, as we Catholics believe.

I don’t put too much stock in what Lutherans say or believe, especially because Martin Luther stated that the Pope is the anti-Christ.

We do share a great deal of theology…but didn’t Luther say that it was the office of the Pope that is the AntiChrist, not any specific Pope?

 

[Lorrie]

We do share a great deal of theology…but didn’t Luther say that it was the office of the Pope that is the AntiChrist, not any specific Pope?

All I know is the following and for me it’s enough:

August 18, 1520 “We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist…personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to Antichrist.” - Martin Luther

 

[Newbie2]

Ah, thank you.

 

[pickguard1]

Well, the Catholic Church does not, in fact, think these are issues with regard to the question of the validity of Anglican orders (or the orders of other groups or churches that have broken away from the Catholic Church, like the orthodox, or some of those groups which have left over Vatican II stuff. All are considered to have valid orders and sacraments.)

I wasn’t actually thinking of them bringing in Eastern Bishops, which as far as I know has never happened. Rather, I was thinking of European, Catholic infusions.

Perhaps a split thread could be started about Anglican Orders/validity? This is something I’m interested in as my father is (was) Episcopalian and his parish is one of the US parishes that split from the U.S. Episcopal Church recently and reformed as “Anglican” under the jusridiction of a Bishop in Latin America I believe. We discuss religion often, but never delve into theology so much, or Church history. Rather, the conversation tends toward woes over the moral issues in the Episcopal church and Anglican communion.

 

[atg2]

hello, good point pickguard1 about the neighbours/enemies thing.

 

[dgrave]

Nope, lots of Catholics do this. So long as you still attend Mass and don’t receive the Eucharist there, it’s fine. However, it is best to take what you are told at the Protestant service with a grain of salt.

The protestants are to be listened to as their theology is based on the holy Word of God, not man made ‘tradition’.

 

[tjm190]

The protestants are to be listened to as their theology is based on the holy Word of God, not man made ‘tradition’.

Given that many denominations allow for divorce, which is one of the few things Jesus specifically abolished, this claim is silly.

 

[Bluegoat]

The Anglicans are not considered to have valid Orders. The others are valid because they move in an unbroken line within themselves - they aren’t bringing in Bishops from outside - from a totally different religion - to do their Ordinations for them.
Um - that’s how Anglicans do their Ordinations, due to the fact that they have no valid Apostolic Succession.

Yes, I’m afraid you are indeed very confused. Anglicans do not bring in Eastern bishops to do their ordinations - I have no clue where you would get such a crazy idea???

Although the Catholic Church believes that the Anglican Church lost their apostolic succession, you need to understand that Anglicans do not agree. And even Catholics who understand the issues that surrounded Anglican apostolic succession know that it isn’t a simple, slam-dunk issue on the Catholic side - it’s a rather technical issue, and not necessarily clearly obvious in either direction.

I have no problem with Catholics who think Anglican orders are invalid - but I do get annoyed when they seem to think it is obvious, and only a moron would disagree. I mean, the Orthodox think that Catholic orders are invalid, but I think Catholics would be annoyed if an Orthodox person went around casually, and definitively implying that the Catholic Eucharist was invalid. It is much different to say “We Orthodox do not recognize Catholic orders or the Eucharist as being valid” and “Catholic sacraments don’t actually work because they aren’t part of the real Church”.

In any case - there are several churches that have beliefs about the Eucharist that are very comparable to those of Catholicism. The question is if they are believable claims.

 

[pickguard1]

hello, good point pickguard1 about the neighbours/enemies thing.

Thanks! I wish I could claim that quote’s origin, but Chesterton beat me to it .

I find it to be particularly elightening, because it makes you realize that “the enemy” isn’t some disembodied concept somewhere “out there,” but is really probably anyone you meet who would try and divert you from your path to God. This probably includes our neighbors as well as close family and friends. So, of course, naturally we love (hopefully) these people - ideally with the intent of making them into “not” our enemies