Baptism recogonized

[Paris_Blues]

I have a question…

If the Catholic Church doesn’t recognize Protestant communion of the bread and wine being the “TRUE” Blood and Body, then why should the CC even recognize baptism in a Protestant church then being “true”?

In other words, if Protestants are just some “make-up” teachings according to some people, then shouldn’t their baptism be not “true” then?

Does anyone have a slightest clue what I’m talking about?

 

[RichSpidizzy]

The reason some Protestant baptisms are considered valid is because they use the proper matter (water) and use proper form (“I baptise you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”). If they don’t use water or they don’t use the Triune formula, then the Baptism is not valid.

The same holds true for communion. In order for communion to be valid, it has to be proper matter (wheat wafer and wine), and proper form (words of consecration spoken by a validly ordained preist). Since protestants don’t have validly ordained preists speaking the words of consecration, the communion is invalid.

 

[diarmait]

Consecration can only be performed by a vaildly ordained priest. However, the ministers of baptism need not be ordained at all. You just need water, the words (I baptize you in the name… etc), and the intent to perform what the Church performs.

Protestants have the proper matter, form, and intent, and thus are able to baptize.

The Catholic Church has held, however, that mormon baptism is not efficacious, since mormons do not mean the same thing by “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”

 

[Mickey]

Paris Blues:

In other words, if Protestants are just some “make-up” teachings according to some people, then shouldn’t their baptism be not “true” then?

Everyone has answered you correctly Paris–but may I add…Protestantism is not just some make-up teaching. Their teachings contain some (partial) truth. It is the Catholic Church that contains the fullness of truth. God Bless!