Help settle argument-valid transubstantiation in other churches

[Gorgias]

then a Pope down the line changed God’s Church to mean The Catholic Church…

Actually… no. “Catholic” means “universal.” (We find it in use in the first decade of the second century AD. In fact, we find it being used there as a means to distinguish between those who follow the faith according to the teachings of Jesus and those who have come up with their own teachings. So, from the very beginning, “Catholic” was used both to mean “all of us who follow Jesus’ commands” and to delineate between those who did and those who didn’t stay in communion with the apostolic Church.

Later, when the break between East and West took place, the West took on the moniker “Catholic” (or universal) while the East took the appellation “Orthodox” (or right belief).

Finally, when the Reformation happened, further distinctions were made: “Roman Catholic” for the Catholic Church, and all sorts of denominations with names based on places (Anglican Church) or founders (Lutherans, Calvinists, etc).

So… the Church which received the proxy of authority from Christ – which has been led in an unbroken chain of apostles and Peter and their successors – has been known by a variety of names through the centuries. (Usually, these names were used derogatively by others and only later appropriated by the Church. You know, like as in “well, you don’t have right belief – you’re ‘universal’!” or “oh… you’re not Christian… you’re Roman…!”)

So, no… it’s not that “a Pope down the line changed God’s Church to mean the Catholic Church”. Rather, it’s that the Church that Jesus founded – on Peter and the Apostles – is what we call “the Catholic Church” today.

so if it’s not from The Catholic Church it’s not valid to God, meaning unacceptable to God?

I think it’s more nuanced than that. We profess that we are in imperfect union with those who call themselves ‘Christian’, who have valid baptism, who love the Scriptures, and among whom we see evidence of the presence of the Holy Spirit. However, that doesn’t imply that they have the fullness of the faith, or access to the sacraments which Christ gave us, and so we pray that “one day, all might be one.” We’re not there yet, though.

So the Lutheran are not taking in the body and blood of Christ, it’s just bread and wine?

Lutherans would say it’s the Eucharist. Catholics would maintain that it’s just bread and wine, since they don’t have priests who are able to consecrate the Eucharist.

There are some things that can be done in God’s by other people and somethings that can only be done by the leaders of the Catholic church?

Not exactly sure what you mean here. What does “done in God’s by other people” mean?

 

[annad347]

So, no… it’s not that “a Pope down the line changed God’s Church to mean the Catholic Church”. Rather, it’s that the Church that Jesus founded – on Peter and the Apostles – is what we call “the Catholic Church” today.

and that doesn’t apply to any church that believes in one holy catholic and apostolic Church, and is built on the foundation of Jesus Christ?

I think it’s more nuanced than that…

However, that doesn’t imply that they have the fullness of the faith, or access to the sacraments which Christ gave us…

but there is no proof they don’t… especially if catholic means universal… The Catholic church just believes they don’t because they’re not Catholic.

They can be taking in the body and blood of Christ, with the same beliefs Catholics are taking in the body and blood of Christ?

I know you can’t say specifically yes or no to that question, I understand… but we can both agree with faith in God, the body and blood of Jesus is with-in us.

Not exactly sure what you mean here. What does “done in God’s by other people” mean?

sorry meant to say in God’s name. I’m talking about the passage Mark 9:39-41

 

[Gorgias]

and that doesn’t apply to any church that believes in one holy catholic and apostolic Church, and is built on the foundation of Jesus Christ?

No. When you abandon an organization and form your own alternate / competing organization, are you still part of that original organization? Of course not – your whole goal was “to leave and govern yourself”! So, if you abandoned the authority of the leadership of the organization (and formed your own leadership and authority), why would you suggest that you still participate in the authority of the original group? That’s the whole reason for leaving, after all – to isolate yourself from them!

So, if that’s the case, then no… “any church [who separated themselves from the Catholic Church] that [says it] believes in ‘one holy catholic and apostolic’, wouldn’t be in the same situation as the Church whom they abandoned!”

but there is no proof they don’t…

They literally profess doctrines that are in conflict with the Catholic Church. How could we possibly say that they have the “fullness of the faith”? If they deny the existence of sacraments, how could we say otherwise?

The Catholic church just believes they don’t because they’re not Catholic.

No. The Catholic Church believes they don’t because we’re honoring their express wishes to divest themselves of all connection with the Church that Christ founded.

They can be taking in the body and blood of Christ, with the same beliefs Catholics are taking in the body and blood of Christ?

Except that… they don’t. Even in what they say they believe. Some say “memorial only”, others say “consubstantiation”, and still others say “mere fellowship.” So… they don’t have Catholic belief.

I know you can’t say specifically yes or no to that question

Actually, I can… and have.

but we can both agree with faith in God, the body and blood of Jesus is with-in us.

Not as such. Spiritually? Sure. We are the Body of Christ. Sacramentally, in the Eucharist? Nope.

 

[AlNg]

And yet, by belief isn’t based on ‘proof’; it’s based on Jesus. And Jesus gave authority to teach to… the Apostles, who handed that authority on to their successors. So, my belief doesn’t come from whether a document is true – it comes from whether Jesus is true. And if He is, then the teaching that flows from Him is true, too.

Where did Jesus say that apostolic succession is absolutely necessary to reenact (Do this in memory of Me) the Last Supper?

 

[Gorgias]

Where did Jesus say that apostolic succession is absolutely necessary to reenact (Do this in memory of Me) the Last Supper?

Jesus said that what Peter (and the Church) held bound on earth, would be bound in heaven. The Church says that valid ordination is necessary. Therefore…

 

[AlNg]

Jesus said that what Peter (and the Church) held bound on earth, would be bound in heaven.

Can you show us where in the Bible Jesus said that whatever the Roman Catholic Church held bound on earth would be bound in heaven? The present Pope kissed the All Holy Ecumenical Greek Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew and I don’t see where they believe that they are bound by papal infallibility.

 

[annad347]

No. When you abandon an organization and form your own alternate / competing organization, are you still part of that original organization? Of course not – your whole goal was “to leave and govern yourself”! So, if you abandoned the authority of the leadership of the organization (and formed your own leadership and authority), why would you suggest that you still participate in the authority of the original group? That’s the whole reason for leaving, after all – to isolate yourself from them!

Okay but the person with authority in the organization, started selling a defective product, one that was killing people. So, would you be abandoning the organization if your first thought was to try to save the integrity and moral reputation of the organization by making those with authority aware people were being killed? Are you abandoning the organization if you wanted to discuss with those in authority, if the organization was being true, honest, righteous to the original blueprint of the organization? That the organization wasn’t the one who abandoned, or being disrespectful, immoral, to original founder of the organization, Jesus Chris?

Are you abandoning the organization when they tell you to shut up, tell you to either go with the program or leave? Are you the one who abandoned the organization because you knew you had to save the people whom the organization was killing, or were you kicked out, then told the world you are a crazy so you can’t help anyone?

 

[annad347]

They literally profess doctrines that are in conflict with the Catholic Church. How could we possibly say that they have the “fullness of the faith”? If they deny the existence of sacraments, how could we say otherwise?

Not if they are literally professing doctrines that is true to the original catholic church, given to them by Peter, the rock and the key holder of the Church.

Nor, do Lutherans deny the existence of the sacrament, if they did, they wouldn’t baptize their members in the name of The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit. They wouldn’t even have The Eucharist if they denied the existence of the sacraments.

No. The Catholic Church believes they don’t because we’re honoring their express wishes to divest themselves of all connection with the Church that Christ founded.

Yet they really haven’t, Lutheran’s haven’t divested themselves from the Church… not the original catholic church.

Except that… they don’t. Even in what they say they believe. Some say “memorial only”, others say “consubstantiation”, and still others say “mere fellowship.” So… they don’t have Catholic belief.

But they do, because they are using the catholic words, the ones Jesus Christ recited, the words written in scripture. For Lutherans bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Christ because Jesus Christ said, this is my body… this is my blood.

Actually, I can… and have.

I meant you would never be able to say that Lutherans beliefs in the Eucharist is the same as Catholics… that you have not done.

Not as such. Spiritually? Sure. We are the Body of Christ. Sacramentally, in the Eucharist? Nope.

Faith in God is not necessary for to have faith in the Sacrament of the Eucharist?

 

[adamhovey1988]

I can believe I am a poached egg, it does not make it true. But, all those bodies that have a VALID apostolic succession (not just Catholics) have a valid Eucharist.

 

[Dovekin]

I meant you would never be able to say that Lutherans beliefs in the Eucharist is the same as Catholics… that you have not done

The issue is complicated. There are broad areas of agreement between Lutherans and Catholics on the Eucharist. I would even say they believe in the Eucharist in he same way we do. But there are beliefs we do not share, and they color our acceptance of their faith in the Eucharist.

Apostolic succession is one of those issues. There is a strain of Catholicism that insists on a chain of bishops laying hands on to transfer the episcopacy from Jesus to the present day. We are not ready to abandon that understanding, though Anglicans (and maybe Lutherans) fulfill his requirement too.

There is another level of Apostolic Succession that belongs to the whole Church. It is a mark of the Church, one of the signs by which we recognize the Church. This has to do with integrity of doctrine, so that the physical sign is not sufficient if the intent of the Church is missing. Here Catholics disagree with Lutherans about this, though both sides believe ordinations must be done with the intent of the Church. Is his enough to say the two sides believe differently? Yes for some, no for others, and the divides are internal, not between Catholics and Lutherans.

Faith in the Eucharist, hope in Christ, will bring us together if God chooses. And if it keeps us apart, we can pray for conversion to the body Christ has left us, united by our love for one another.

 

[Gorgias]

Can you show us where in the Bible Jesus said that whatever the Roman Catholic Church held bound on earth would be bound in heaven?

Sure!

[Jesus] said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”

Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

That’s Matthew 16:15-19. Jesus talks to Peter and grants him that absolute authority. With that authority, Peter authorizes apostolic succession (you can read about that in the Book of Acts).

So, there you go…! From Jesus’ lips to our ears. Or eyes. Or whatever…

The present Pope kissed the All Holy Ecumenical Greek Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew and I don’t see where they believe that they are bound by papal infallibility.

What’s that kiss – a greeting – have to do with anything?

 

[Gorgias]

Okay but the person with authority in the organization, started selling a defective product…

So, would you be abandoning the organization if your first thought was to try to save the integrity and moral reputation of the organization…

Are you abandoning the organization if you wanted to discuss with those in authority…

And if the organization – with the divine authority invested in it – answered “we think you’re wrong”, then what? Leave the divinely-instituted church because you think you’re more right than they?

Are you abandoning the organization when they tell you to shut up, tell you to either go with the program or leave?

Actually, that’s not what they said. They didn’t tell him to leave. He refused to obey their lawful commands, and he said “I’m outta here” and they replied “bye”.

Not if they are literally professing doctrines that is true to the original catholic church, given to them by Peter, the rock and the key holder of the Church.

A couple thoughts:

• the doctrines weren’t given to them. they were given to the Church. They left the church. If they want to hold to some of the rules, that’s up to them (since they’re a separate organization now, remember?). But, that doesn’t mean that the authority comes from God. It comes from the new breakaway leadership, who usurped power for themselves. (Let’s be honest: the rise of the Reformation movement wasn’t so much based in Luther as it was in local authorities who wanted to be out from under the rule of Rome. They just saw a good opportunity in Luther’s defection, and ran with it.)
• even if they agreed to 90% of the doctrines of the Church they defected from, they’re still making it up on their own. There’s a quote from Augustine that’s been set to modern language, and it goes something like this: “If you believe what you like in the Gospel, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the Gospel you believe, but yourself.”

They wouldn’t even have The Eucharist if they denied the existence of the sacraments.

Except that they define the Eucharist very differently than the Church does. Not only in what it is (“consubstantiation”), but in what the liturgy that produces it is (not a “sacrifice”, and not confected by a priest).

Yet they really haven’t, Lutheran’s haven’t divested themselves from the Church… not the original catholic church.

Uh-huh. And please tell me how the Catholic Church isn’t the “original catholic church”?

annad347:

For Lutherans bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Christ because Jesus Christ said, this is my body… this is my blood.

Jesus also said that Peter was the leader. They don’t so much want to follow those words of Jesus, though…

annad347:

Faith in God is not necessary for to have faith in the Sacrament of the Eucharist?

Of course it is. However, faith in God is not sufficient for faith in the True Eucharist.

 

[AlNg]

Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

But it is also written that what God has shut do not open, and what God has opened do not shut.

 

[AlNg]

Apostolic succession is one of those issues. There is a strain of Catholicism that insists on a chain of bishops laying hands on to transfer the episcopacy from Jesus to the present day.

Why is apostolic succession necessary? Did not Jesus say: “For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

 

[Gorgias]

But it is also written that what God has shut do not open, and what God has opened do not shut.

Are you thinking of Isaiah 22:22? If so, you’re getting the person it refers to wrong – it’s the “head of the household”, not the king.

Perhaps you’re thinking of Rev 3:7, though? If so, then the context is the key to the heavenly Jerusalem, and that’s where Christ is, and so he’s ruling there. (The pope only rules as Christ’s vicar here on earth.)

 

[AlNg]

Perhaps you’re thinking of Rev 3:7, though? If so, then the context is the key to the heavenly Jerusalem , and that’s where Christ is, and so he’s ruling there.

It says that these are the words of Him who is Holy and True. Who could that be?
What He has opened, let no man shut and what He has shut let no man open.
Marriage annulments?
Mark 10 Jesus said: “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”

 

[Gorgias]

It says that these are the words of Him who is Holy and True. Who could that be?

In Revelation? Yes, that’s Jesus. He rules the Heavenly Jerusalem. The pope rules on earth.

Annulments are granted on earth.

 

[annad347]

Here Catholics disagree with Lutherans about this, though both sides believe ordinations must be done with the intent of the Church. Is his enough to say the two sides believe differently? Yes for some, no for others, and the divides are internal, not between Catholics and Lutherans.

IMO, the differences are so minute there shouldn’t be an issue, but pride is what’s keeping both Catholics and Lutherans from making the statement official for their congregations. At least they are having discussions with each other to unite because of their love for God… and like you said when God chooses for them to unite, they will.

And if the organization – with the divine authority invested in it – answered “we think you’re wrong”, then what? Leave the divinely-instituted church because you think you’re more right than they?

If those with divine authority is literally killing its members, are you supposed to accept their actions because they were given divine authority?

Let’s be honest: the rise of the Reformation movement wasn’t so much based in Luther as it was in local authorities who wanted to be out from under the rule of Rome. They just saw a good opportunity in Luther’s defection, and ran with it

0r Rome was using money and power to dictate how the church should be run, whether it went against the Word of God… history tells us not all those with authority in the Church, really deserved to have authority in the Church. So, if they shouldn’t have had authority to begin with, how divine could their authority have been?

Now it sounds like I’m not Catholic because I disagree with the actions of some Popes… which isn’t true.

I’m just saying there is no proof that other churches do not have valid transubstantiation of the Eucharist… and that Lutheran’s believe the bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Christ.

 

[Gorgias]

IMO, the differences are so minute there shouldn’t be an issue, but pride is what’s keeping both Catholics and Lutherans from making the statement official for their congregations

I think there’s some truth in that!

I’ve always agreed with the opinion that bureaucracies are self-perpetuating and fiercely protective of their position. So, whenever a new group wrests power for themselves and establishes itself, it is rare (to the point of non-existent) that they willingly give up that power. So, having created a new church for themselves, I cannot picture the Lutheran Church suddenly saying, one day, “meh… let’s just fold our tent and call it a day; we’ll rejoin the Catholic Church”.

To your other assertion, though, I disagree that the differences are “minute”. (After all, if they were, then why not rejoin the Catholic Church once the “defective product” was fixed (in the Counter-Reformation)?) Look at the differences:

The Catholic Church says:	Martin Luther says:
The Eucharist is a propitiatory sacrifice...	The Mass is the promise and testament of Christ ... let us permit nothing to prevail against these words--even though an angel from heaven should teach otherwise--for they contain nothing about a work or a sacrifice.1
offered by the ministerial priest...	We are all priests, as many of us as are Christians. But the 'priests', as we call them, are 'ministers' chosen from among us, who do all that they do in our name.2 We take some from among these born priest and call and elect them to these offices that they may discharge the duties of the office in the name of all of us.3
on behalf of the living and the dead.	The Mass is not a work which may be communicated to others.4

1 Martin Luther, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church

2 Ibid.

3 Ewald M. Plass, What Luther Says.

4 Luther.

And that doesn’t even begin to examine the differences in the competing theologies about what the Eucharist itself is…

If those with divine authority is literally killing its members

You’ll have to explain that one to me. I’m not getting what you’re trying to assert. But, since you bring up “killing its own members”, let’s not forget Luther’s own call to violence: “let everyone who can, smite, slay and stab, secretly or openly, [the rebellious Christian peasants]” (from Luther’s Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants).

0r Rome was using money and power to dictate how the church should be run, whether it went against the Word of God

And you think that the national churches which were born of the Reformation didn’t do exactly that, too?

 

[Gorgias]

I’m just saying there is no proof that other churches do not have valid transubstantiation of the Eucharist…

There’s no “proof”. There is, however, the authority to proclaim what it is… and only through apostolic and Petrine ministry does one have that authority.

Lutheran’s believe the bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Christ.

No… that’s what Catholics believe. Lutherans believe that the bread and wine remains, but that the body and blood of Christ merely become present as well.