Can Someone Explain Protestant Churches who have the Holy Eucharist?

[JonNC]

But you are demanding something from Christ…the authority to change the rules He set down. You said that what your church believes is all that matters; I could almost hear a light-hearted “nyah nyah!” after that sentence. How is that any different from what I believe being all that matters? **Your church was started by a sinful human being…who or what gave him the authority to demand changes to Christ’s rules? **QUOTE]
Only if christ was a sinful man. But if we are speaking of the non-divine, Peter was indeed quite the sinful man.

Curiously, though, which rules that Christ set down are you speaking of?

Jon

 

[RevNeal]

And to further complicate, the words of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger: …

Dear Jon,

Thanks for this quote. Can you give me the source, please? I’d love to read the full context of his statement. I’ve been working my way through all of his published books, and find him both a lucid and compelling thinker and author. While I certainly disagree with the RCC’s position on this subject, I can appreciate the approach he articulates here. It fits well with something he said to the Methodist/Catholic Dialog back in 2002 regarding the “clear evidence of the sanctifying real presence of Jesus in Methodist Communions, notwithstanding the question of valid orders.”

 

[PJM]

=jinc1019;8997542]I don’t really understand how Episcopalians, Anglicans, or other Protestant branches are able to have Holy Communion. Can someone please explain this to me? Also, can someone direct me to a list of churches (other than the orthodox Churches in the East) that Rome allows to give Holy Communion that are not in the Latin Church or the Eastern Churches? Are there any other Protestant churches that are able to give Holy Communion or is it just Episcopalian/Anglican?

They DO NOT have it validly AND LICTLY or FULLY and REALLY as we Catholic do

 

[hn160]

They DO NOT have it validly AND LICTLY or FULLY and REALLY as we Catholic do

I guess that you know the mind of God!!!

 

[JonNC]

Dear Jon,

Thanks for this quote. Can you give me the source, please? I’d love to read the full context of his statement. I’ve been working my way through all of his published books, and find him both a lucid and compelling thinker and author. While I certainly disagree with the RCC’s position on this subject, I can appreciate the approach he articulates here. It fits well with something he said to the Methodist/Catholic Dialog back in 2002 regarding the “clear evidence of the sanctifying real presence of Jesus in Methodist Communions, notwithstanding the question of valid orders.”

Hi Pastor,
I first saw it here, in paragraph 107:
nccbuscc.org/seia/koinonia.shtml

It was in a letter he wrote to German Lutheran Bishop Johannes Hanselmann. It is published in the Cardinal’s book, *Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith: The Church as Communion *

Jon

 

[JonNC]

I guess that you know the mind of God!!!

No, hn, he is reflecting the teachings of his communion.

Jon

 

[RevNeal]

Hi Pastor,
I first saw it here, in paragraph 107:
nccbuscc.org/seia/koinonia.shtml

It was in a letter he wrote to German Lutheran Bishop Johannes Hanselmann. It is published in the Cardinal’s book, *Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith: The Church as Communion *

Thank you! I appreciate it. I’ll add that book to my list of his books to buy. I’ve been working my way through his series on Jesus and the Apostles, and I’ve also read his God is Near Us: The Eucharist, the Heart of Life. Excellent.

 

[Lochias]

Lochias;9017641:

But you are

demanding something from Christ…the authority to change the rules He set down. You said that what your church believes is all that matters; I could almost hear a light-hearted “nyah nyah!” after that sentence. How is that any different from what I believe being all that matters? **Your church was started by a sinful human being…who or what gave him the authority to demand changes to Christ’s rules? **QUOTE]

Only if christ was a sinful man. But if we are speaking of the non-divine, Peter was indeed quite the sinful man.

The Lutheran church was started by Luther. Luther was a sinful man, as are we all, men and woman.

Curiously, though, which rules that Christ set down are you speaking of?
**
The rules by which Christ sets up Peter as the head of His church, establishes the Eucharist, gives the Apostles the authority to forgive others’ sins in His name, and many others. Threads on those verses, and on the long-standing traditions of the first Christians (Catholics) who learned from them are covered all over the site, if you need more info. See also “A Biblical Defense of Catholicism” by Dave Armstrong. Great stuff.**

Jon

 

[JonNC]

The Lutheran church was started by Luther. Luther was a sinful man, as are we all, men and woman.

This isn’t the way Lutherans see it. We confess the One, Holy,Catholic, and Apostolic Church, instituted by Christ. We are indeed part of the One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

The rules by which Christ sets up Peter as the head of His church, establishes the Eucharist, gives the Apostles the authority to forgive others’ sins in His name, and many others. Threads on those verses, and on the long-standing traditions of the first Christians (Catholics) who learned from them are covered all over the site, if you need more info. See also “A Biblical Defense of Catholicism” by Dave Armstrong. Great stuff.

The issue is not that Christ set up His Church on Peter’s confession, and even Peter as one of the Apostles. The issue is whether that institution is as the CC says it is. We agree that the Church has as its call to preach the word and administer the sacraments.

Jon

 

[Lochias]

This isn’t the way Lutherans see it. We confess the One, Holy,Catholic, and Apostolic Church, instituted by Christ. We are indeed part of the One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

Well, as you wish. We’ll have to disagree here.

The issue is not that Christ set up His Church on Peter’s confession, and even Peter as one of the Apostles. The issue is whether that institution is as the CC says it is. We agree that the Church has as its call to preach the word and administer the sacraments.
Jon

Good common ground to start on, at least. May I say that, even while we disagree, it’s been nice to actually have a debate and discussion rather than an argument? Quite refreshing, and it is much appreciated. These kinds of talks help me expand my love and view of others, and that is much appreciated as well. Thank you, very much.

Edit: I still recommend the book by Dave Armstrong, too. Much of what you take issue with is discussed there, in a thorough manner. You may at least find it interesting, and a very grounded view of the RC viewpoint.

 

[GKC]

Well, as you wish. We’ll have to disagree here.

Good common ground to start on, at least. May I say that, even while we disagree, it’s been nice to actually have a debate and discussion rather than an argument? Quite refreshing, and it is much appreciated. These kinds of talks help me expand my love and view of others, and that is much appreciated as well. Thank you, very much.

In my experience, JonNC is good at that sort of thing.

GKC

 

[Captain_America]

There are no Protestant churches with the Holy Eucharist.

 

[AlwaysCurious]

Thank you! I appreciate it. I’ll add that book to my list of his books to buy. I’ve been working my way through his series on Jesus and the Apostles, and I’ve also read his God is Near Us: The Eucharist, the Heart of Life. Excellent.

I recommend his book Called to Communion: Understanding the Church Today. A nice overview of Catholic ecclesiology. It’s been a while since I’ve read it, but if I remember correctly he has some things to say about the sacraments as well. Seems to me that the validity of the Eucharist, like so many other things in the life of the Faith, comes down to a matter of authority.

 

[Kristin234]

Catholics do not consider Protestant Eucharist to be valid. Some Protestant churches do not even call it a eucharist because they only do it in memory and not the way Catholics do it. Other Protestant churches have the Eucharist and truly believe their Eucharist is valid.

All Orthodox Churches believe their Eucharist is valid and I know the Catholic Church recognizes their as valid, but some Orthodox Churches and the ACOE which I am most familiar with do not recognize the Catholic Eucharist as valid.

It all depends on the church.

It is going to go back and forth. Catholics will say theirs is valid while Protestant’s isn’t. Protestants will say theirs is valid too. Churches like the ACOE will say Catholic’s isn’t valid even if the Catholic Church says theirs is. No one will ever agree.

 

[GKC]

I recommend his book Called to Communion: Understanding the Church Today. A nice overview of Catholic ecclesiology. It’s been a while since I’ve read it, but if I remember correctly he has some things to say about the sacraments as well. Seems to me that the validity of the Eucharist, like so many other things in the life of the Faith, comes down to a matter of authority.

facere quod facit ecclesia. The minister must use a valid form and valid matter. Given these, a valid sacrament can be assumed to be confected. Whether it would be a licit one might still requiring investigating.

GKC

 

[JonNC]

Originally Posted by Lochias
Good common ground to start on, at least. May I say that, even while we disagree, it’s been nice to actually have a debate and discussion rather than an argument? Quite refreshing, and it is much appreciated. These kinds of talks help me expand my love and view of others, and that is much appreciated as well. Thank you, very much.

In my experience, JonNC is good at that sort of thing.

GKC

To both of you, thank you.

Jon

 

[hn160]

There are no Protestant churches with the Holy Eucharist.

The Marks of a Church are where the Word of God is preached and the Sacraments are rightly administrated and this describes the Lutheran Church. Our Holy Eucharist is just as valid as Roman Catholic Eucharist.

 

[gcnuss]

But you are demanding something from Christ…the authority to change the rules He set down. You said that what your church believes is all that matters; I could almost hear a light-hearted “nyah nyah!” after that sentence. How is that any different from what I believe being all that matters?

First, I can assure you that there was no implied “nyah,nyah,” light-hearted or otherwise. And, I still maintain that we do not demand anything from Christ – nor would we have the temerity to do so. We put our trust in Christ and seek to follow him as far as we are able, including celebrating the Eucharist in response to his command “do this in remembrance of me.”

Your church was started by a sinful human being…who or what gave him the authority to demand changes to Christ’s rules?

Luther did not create a church ex nihilo. The Lutheran church would not exist were it not for Christ and his followers through the ages, including our Catholic brothers and sisters. Christ, not Luther, is the origin and center of our faith. As far as I know, Christ did not establish any rule saying that he would be present in the Eucharist only if it is celebrated according to the canons of the Catholic Church.

I could go on at greater length but I think I’ve said what I wanted to say. It does pain me that we are separated by our expressions of faith in our Lord.

 

[Lochias]

First, I can assure you that there was no implied “nyah,nyah,” light-hearted or otherwise. And, I still maintain that we do not demand anything from Christ – nor would we have the temerity to do so. We put our trust in Christ and seek to follow him as far as we are able, including celebrating the Eucharist in response to his command “do this in remembrance of me.”

Duly noted about the “nyah’s.” I mean no offense here, but I would say that “I still maintain” is not far removed from “I want it to be”. The statement carries little in the way of authority, in terms of its ability to convince.

Luther did not create a church ex nihilo. The Lutheran church would not exist were it not for Christ and his followers through the ages, including our Catholic brothers and sisters. Christ, not Luther, is the origin and center of our faith. As far as I know, Christ did not establish any rule saying that he would be present in the Eucharist only if it is celebrated according to the canons of the Catholic Church.

I could go on at greater length but I think I’ve said what I wanted to say. It does pain me that we are separated by our expressions of faith in our Lord.

But the canons of the Catholic Church were exactly what Christ instituted, and that’s how it was for all Christians for a long, long time. There is no indication, rule or otherwise to suggest that Christ desired his Church to split into factions. Indeed, a hand or a lung or an eye was never meant to separate from the body, nor would such an organ or limb think itself able to live away from the body it is attached to.

And, pains me too. Thank you for speaking your mind, it is appreciated. Hope to see you around the forums, so to speak.

 

[JonNC]

=Lochias;9030387]But the canons of the Catholic Church were exactly what Christ instituted, and that’s how it was for all Christians for a long, long time.

What is your evidence or source for this?

There is no indication, rule or otherwise to suggest that Christ desired his Church to split into factions. Indeed, a hand or a lung or an eye was never meant to separate from the body, nor would such an organ or limb think itself able to live away from the body it is attached to.

This is a separate issue from the question of validity of Lutheran clergy and sacraments. To be sure, we absolutely agree that the division between us is not what Christ calls for. You (Catholics) are our brothers and sisters in Christ, and we are yours, and we mus do all that is possible to find reconciliation.

Jon