H
Holly3278
Guest
Hey everyone. Are Protestant “churches” considered to be churches or ecclesial communities?
Are Protestant "churches" considered to be churches or ecclesial communities?
- Status
1
1ke
Guest
They are not Churches. They are ecclesial communities.
Churches have valid Apostolic Succession and Holy Orders.
Churches have valid Apostolic Succession and Holy Orders.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
All Protestant communities (every one of them, that has its origin in the heresies of Martin Luther, whether nor not they use the word “Protestant”) are ecclesial communities and not Churches.
B
bona_fides_1
Guest
Absolutely and formally speaking - no. Protestant “churches” have no unique, nor seperate nor any mystical relationship to Jesus. These are ecclesial or faith communities who’s community has NO mystical relationship with Christ. That said, the individual baptised members in these ecclesial communities are in an estranged and defective communion with the Body of Christ through the sacrament of baptism.
BF
BF
R
rben20
Guest
Do we recognize the Orthodox as having Churches?
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Yes.
B
bona_fides_1
Guest
Indeed. The Orthodox have valid apostolic succession and are essentially the same Catholic faith - just in schism more so for political reasons than for spiritual reasons. I think we will get them back unified into the Catholic Church in my lifetime. Hoping…
BF
S
steve_b
Guest
No
H:
yes
JPII wrote about it vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html
M
markomalley
Guest
From the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church, June 29, 2007:
FIFTH QUESTION
Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of “Church” with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?
RESPONSE
According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery[19] cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called “Churches” in the proper sense[20].
Also, for a more complete explanation, please refer to the associated commentary.
M
markomalley
Guest
From the document referenced in post #9, above:FOURTH QUESTION
Why does the Second Vatican Council use the term “Church” in reference to the oriental Churches separated from full communion with the Catholic Church?
RESPONSE
The Council wanted to adopt the traditional use of the term. “Because these Churches, although separated, have true sacraments and above all – because of the apostolic succession – the priesthood and the Eucharist, by means of which they remain linked to us by very close bonds”[13], they merit the title of “particular or local Churches”[14], and are called sister Churches of the particular Catholic Churches.[15]
“It is through the celebration of the Eucharist of the Lord in each of these Churches that the Church of God is built up and grows in stature”.[16][17] However, since communion with the Catholic Church, the visible head of which is the Bishop of Rome and the Successor of Peter, is not some external complement to a particular Church but rather one of its internal constitutive principles, these venerable Christian communities lack something in their condition as particular churches.
On the other hand, because of the division between Christians, the fullness of universality, which is proper to the Church governed by the Successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him, is not fully realised in history.[18]
Again, please look at the associated commentary (link in the above post, as well)
Hi BF,
Indeed. The Orthodox have valid apostolic succession and are essentially the same Catholic faith - just in schism more so for political reasons than for spiritual reasons. I think we will get them back unified into the Catholic Church in my lifetime. Hoping…
BF
What about others who have maintained Apostolic Succession? Old Catholics, PNCC, and some Scandinavian Lutherans?
Jon
B
bona_fides_1
Guest
I honestly am not sure here Jon but am inclined to think these are more like renegade cults and lack any sense of a unity and/or universality principal. Old Catholics might be a little different since they were at one time, to my historical recollection, authorized and recognized by Rome. I don’t have definitive knowledge to speak with much conviction on these but tend to “feel” that they have been isolated and and marooned into a cultish sort of status without any real standards of orthodoxy (unity of faith). Just going on raw intuition here.
BF
A
Adam_Warlock
Guest
What is the purpose in raising a topic which is discussed *ad nauseam * all over the internet - a topic which deeply wounds and offends Protestant Christians, and one to which we all know the answer? What good is served by asking such a question?
Furthermore, why do so many respondents speak of “churches” while simultaneously denying the existence of more than one?
Furthermore, why do so many respondents speak of “churches” while simultaneously denying the existence of more than one?
R
rev_kevin
Guest
Define Church.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Hi Jon,
Great as always to see your posts. I think this thread is baiting for sure and not in any way edifying. Benedict has made his statements about “ecclesial communities” versus “Church” so this has already been addressed by the Magisterium IMO.
I agree with you that the PNCC and Old Catholics of Utrecht and the Anglican bodies that have valid apostolic lines through PNCC and Old Catholic lines are a problem for Catholics to demode to “ecclesiastical bodies” in that they have valid succession and sacraments by Catholic definitions. Scandinavian Lutherans, as you point out, also retain succession.
Great as always to see your posts. I think this thread is baiting for sure and not in any way edifying. Benedict has made his statements about “ecclesial communities” versus “Church” so this has already been addressed by the Magisterium IMO.
I agree with you that the PNCC and Old Catholics of Utrecht and the Anglican bodies that have valid apostolic lines through PNCC and Old Catholic lines are a problem for Catholics to demode to “ecclesiastical bodies” in that they have valid succession and sacraments by Catholic definitions. Scandinavian Lutherans, as you point out, also retain succession.
C
Corki
Guest
Because this is Catholic Answers. A question like this is an important one for Catholics to understand. If a Protestant is offended by this type of discussion, it is unlikely that he/she is hanging out on Catholic forums.
There are many Churches. 23 or so sui juris (Eastern Catholic) Churches, several Orthodox Churches and the Latin Catholic Church. We don’t deny the existance of other Churches at all.
That’s what we are attempting to do.
T
Todd520
Guest
Maybe the Pope meant they can be a church BUT NOT a Christian Church.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
I agree with Adam here. This topic has been discussed to death, the pope has ruled on this, there’s plenty of info on it, and it’s not productive apologetic engagement for Catholics IMO. It’s more productive to talk about what Catholicism HAS as opposed to the lacking, insufficient, emptiness of the others. It is certainly a topic that could offend, contrary to what you say here, and some Protestants who come on CAF with some interest in Catholicism might see this as a lack of charity and you’ll lose interest quickly.
Because this is Catholic Answers. A question like this is an important one for Catholics to understand. If a Protestant is offended by this type of discussion, it is unlikely that he/she is hanging out on Catholic forums.
There are many Churches. 23 or so sui juris (Eastern Catholic) Churches, several Orthodox Churches and the Latin Catholic Church. We don’t deny the existance of other Churches at all.
That’s what we are attempting to do.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
C
Corki
Guest
Not every question posted on CAF is going to result in the same level of productive discussion. Not every questioner is coming from the same background.
BTW, the OP didn’t post this question in the Apologetics forum so it’s a bit unfair to judge the question on its apologetics value, don’t you think?
If it isn’t a topic that you have interest in, then don’t participate. Obviously there are some people who are interested. So far, I haven’t seen any lack of charity but that’s what the moderators are here for.
- Status