Are Protestant "churches" considered to be churches or ecclesial communities?

[gurneyhalleck1]

Corki, seeing as how we’re all adults, I don’t need to hear the advice: if you’re not interested don’t participate. Please don’t patronize me. It’s unnecessary.

I find it unnecessary to have this thread seeing as how this topic can be found in the archives up the yin-yang, it’s been discussed, as Adam said, ad nauseum, and the pope has ruled on it. It’s a sensitive topic that can easily insult non-Catholics and damage fruitful discussion IMO. I’ve said my peace about it.

I think it’s perfectly fair to judge this thread for its apologetics value any day of the week. As Catholics posting in a non-Catholic religions section, apologetics is implied and imperative for Catholics witnessing to Protestants, Orthodox, etc. no? A Catholic is an apologist pretty much everywhere on Catholic Answers Forums. At least he/she should be.

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.

 

[KathleenGee]

The Church is essentially a ‘communion of saints’’: this referring first to the “holy things”, above all the Eucharist, by which “the unity of believers, who form one body in Christ, is both represented and brought about.” Lumen Gentium, CC 960.

1. The term “communion of saints” refers also to the communion of “holy persons” in Christ who “died for all” so that what each one does or suffers in and for Christ bears fruit for all.
2. “We believe in the communion of all the faithful of Christ, those who are pilgrims on earth, the dead who are being purified, and the blessed in heaven, all together forming one Church; and we believe that in this communion, the merciful love of God and his saints is always attentive to our prayers.” Pope Paul VI.

When the term ecclesial community is used, it simply means those assemblies of Christians are defined by not fully participating in the 7 sacraments of the Church – almost all have the Catholic rite of baptism, but do not have bishops, Eucharist and confession, holy orders, matrimony, confirmation-- a confirming and deepening anointing of the Holy Spirit beyond baptism, and the sacrament of healing. Many communities have healing. The Church recognizes them as Christians party of the mystical body of Christ through baptism.

So the more a community breaks away from the 7 sacraments, and the history and usage therein, the much more difficult it is for them to experience communion with the Catholic Church. We Catholics always pray for our separated brethren and the priest’s Sunday homily is always on the Word of God, the times we are living in, and how we live out our faith in these times.

 

[Adam_Warlock]

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.
**

It seems that you do, when you say that there is only One Church. But be that as it may, there is little good that comes from topics like this. And I don’t need to point out that this is a non-Catholic section on a Catholic forum. If people frequently remind other Christians that their churches (usually encased in quotes) are bogus, their clergy are invalid, and their services lack grace and the presence of God…there won’t be many non-Catholics left in the non-Catholic forum. I fail to see much good that will come from discussions that might be perceived as taunting.

“Master,” said John, “we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we tried to stop him, because he is not one of us.” “Do not stop him,” Jesus said, “for whoever is not against you is for you.” - St. Luke 9:49-50.

This sentiment is something I strive to live by.

 

[JReducation]

For a community to be a Church it must have an uninterrupted line of succession to one of the Churches founded by the Apostles. The Reformation communities lost the line of succession once they no longer had validly ordained bishops. A Church is always founded upon the faith of the Apostles. The Apostles ordained their successors and so forth down the line. That’s how we can have Churches that are in schism, but remain true Churches. Even though they broke communion with the Pontiff, they did not break communion with the Apostles.

Churches like the Polish National Church, Old Catholics and a few others, to the best of my knowledge continue to have ordinations of bishops by validly ordained bishoops, even though they are illicitly ordained.

The illicit does not apply to the Orthodox, because the Orthodox are not a splinter from the Catholic Church. What actually happened there was a split between them and the Oriental Catholics. They were never part of the Roman Church, i.e. Greek Orthodox and Greek Catholics and so forth. Therefore, they are not part of the Reformation and were not founded by heretics.

We have to be very careful here. The fact that Luther was a heretic does not make Lutherans heretics. The error was made by Luther, not by those born into the Lutheran community. Christ does use these communities to save, because he uses whatever means they have to grace to grant them salvation. They have many means to grace, though they don’t have every means to grace as do Catholics and Orthodox who have a full sacramental system. Nonetheless, they have many means that they received from their formerlly Catholic founders.

That’s how they can be saved without violating the dogma of “outside the Church there is no salvation.” They have means that are found within the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church acknowledges those means. To deny them would be dishonest.

I realize that they were often denied or overlooked at one time, because there was so much hurt and anger between Protestants and Catholics. Today, the hurt and anger has subsided and people are thinking much more clearly. We still hurt to see the Body of Christ divided and we will hurt until it is reunified. But it’s a different kind of hurt.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Reuben_J]

It seems that you do, when you say that there is only One Church. But be that as it may, there is little good that comes from topics like this. And I don’t need to point out that this is a non-Catholic section on a Catholic forum. If people frequently remind other Christians that their churches (usually encased in quotes) are bogus, their clergy are invalid, and their services lack grace and the presence of God…there won’t be many non-Catholics left in the non-Catholic forum. I fail to see much good that will come from discussions that might be perceived as taunting.

“Master,” said John, “we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we tried to stop him, because he is not one of us.” “Do not stop him,” Jesus said, “for whoever is not against you is for you.” - St. Luke 9:49-50.

This sentiment is something I strive to live by.

I hope you are not too discouraged by the Catholics here. It’s a Catholic thing; it’s their definition. As Catholics they cannot deny the definition of ‘church’ as how she defines it.

I agree with you thread like this does not create a conducive atmosphere for discussion especially if we want Protestants to participate while it would be absolutely alright if Catholics only discuss it. If it’s any consolation, this only highlights our differences – something that we have to accept as a reality.

Catholics will think you guys are merely ecclesial while you have all the rights to consider yourselves church. Ultimately they are merely words depending on which side of the divides we are.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Actually from the Catholic standpoint (not from mine) the Orthodox are indeed practicing illicit orders. From Rome’s angle, the East is in schism. Schism is schism, pure and simple. Anglicans breaking off from Catholicism is no different from Orthodox (theoretically) breaking communion from Rome.

Catholics see the papacy as universally supreme in jurisdiction, infallible, the heart and soul, the nerve center of Christendom. Pope Benedict XVI even said, much to the chagrin and frustration of Orthodox Christians, that Orthodoxy is “defective” since it lacks the papacy. One can hardly expect a “defective” Church to have licit sacraments. They are indeed illicit in that they’re outside the communion of Rome and the Chair of Peter.

For a community to be a Church it must have an uninterrupted line of succession to one of the Churches founded by the Apostles. The Reformation communities lost the line of succession once they no longer had validly ordained bishops. A Church is always founded upon the faith of the Apostles. The Apostles ordained their successors and so forth down the line. That’s how we can have Churches that are in schism, but remain true Churches. Even though they broke communion with the Pontiff, they did not break communion with the Apostles.

Churches like the Polish National Church, Old Catholics and a few others, to the best of my knowledge continue to have ordinations of bishops by validly ordained bishoops, even though they are illicitly ordained.

The illicit does not apply to the Orthodox, because the Orthodox are not a splinter from the Catholic Church. What actually happened there was a split between them and the Oriental Catholics. They were never part of the Roman Church, i.e. Greek Orthodox and Greek Catholics and so forth. Therefore, they are not part of the Reformation and were not founded by heretics.

We have to be very careful here. The fact that Luther was a heretic does not make Lutherans heretics. The error was made by Luther, not by those born into the Lutheran community. Christ does use these communities to save, because he uses whatever means they have to grace to grant them salvation. They have many means to grace, though they don’t have every means to grace as do Catholics and Orthodox who have a full sacramental system. Nonetheless, they have many means that they received from their formerlly Catholic founders.

That’s how they can be saved without violating the dogma of “outside the Church there is no salvation.” They have means that are found within the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church acknowledges those means. To deny them would be dishonest.

I realize that they were often denied or overlooked at one time, because there was so much hurt and anger between Protestants and Catholics. Today, the hurt and anger has subsided and people are thinking much more clearly. We still hurt to see the Body of Christ divided and we will hurt until it is reunified. But it’s a different kind of hurt.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Great post, Reuben!

I hope you are not too discouraged by the Catholics here. It’s a Catholic thing; it’s their definition. As Catholics they cannot deny the definition of ‘church’ as how she defines it.

I agree with you thread like this does not create a conducive atmosphere for discussion especially if we want Protestants to participate while it would be absolutely alright if Catholics only discuss it. If it’s any consolation, this only highlights our differences – something that we have to accept as a reality.

Catholics will think you guys are merely ecclesial while you have all the rights to consider yourselves church. Ultimately they are merely words depending on which side of the divides we are.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Question beautifully answered by JReducation.

Thread closed.