Protestant Communion?

[Graceful_Lamb]

You cannot have the sacraments without the consecrated priesthood.

Where does it say that in the Bible?

 

[eamonnroma]

Despite what the above posters may tell you and what they may falsely believe, Our Lord Jesus is NOT present in Protestant “communion” in any way whatsoever. This is because they reject the Truth of transubstantiation from bread and wine into the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ and do NOT have the valid apostolic succession necessary in order for the consecration to take place.

Only in the Holy Catholic Church can transubstantiation truly occur and only in the Holy Catholic Church is the Holy Eucharist truly Jesus.

May God bless you all abundantly and forever and guide you to the Light of His Holy Catholic Church!

Christ is present in the Eucharist. Christ is present at the proclamation of the Gospel. Christ is present when two or three persons are gathered in his name. Therefore I contend that Christ is present at a protestant Eucharist, as it is a gathering of Christians in his name. As to how we describe this presence is not so important. How can we quantify the presence of Christ? How can he be more present?

If you mean by the Holy Catholic Church, the Roman Catholic Church, then you are somewhat inaccurate. In any Church with genuine apostolic succession, transubstantiation occurs (if you must use the term). That includes of course the Orthodox Churches, Old Catholics and so on.

 

[eamonnroma]

No.

There is no Communion unless it is consecrated by a validly ordained priest.

And a validly ordained priest is not limited to the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[eamonnroma]

We believe in the real presence , Jesus is with , in and under the elements (Sacramental Union ) and our pastors are validly ordained. Apostolic succession is not mandated by the Holy Scriptures but apostolic teaching is . Ordination without so called apostolic succession is perfectly valid.

So does this mean than anyone can start a Church, and then start ordaining people?

 

[Elizium23]

Where does it say that in the Bible?

Thankfully, the Catholic Church does not believe in sola scriptura, and not everything needs to be explicitly mentioned in Sacred Scripture in order to be true.

 

[Graceful_Lamb]

Thankfully, the Catholic Church does not believe in sola scriptura, and not everything needs to be explicitly mentioned in Sacred Scripture in order to be true.

In other words, a man made law.

 

[Elizium23]

In other words, a man made law.

Scripture is manmade, honey.

 

[Elizium23]

In other words, a man made law.

Do our beliefs and traditions come from God or are they of human origin?

Catholics believe that those doctrinal and moral teachings taught by the Church since the beginning of Christian history were given by Jesus to the apostles and handed on by them to their successors through the centuries (2 Tim. 2:1–2). These teachings are known as Sacred Tradition.

Other Catholic traditions, more aptly called disciplines (e.g., priestly celibacy) and customs (e.g., Advent wreaths), are “manmade” in the sense that they were developed over the centuries by Christians who created them as means to better live out their Christian faith.

Answered by: Michelle Arnold

Should extra-biblical traditions have the same weight as those described in Scripture?

When Paul tells us in Scripture to follow the traditions they have taught, does Tradition end there? Can traditions start after biblical times? If they can, how do we explain to others that we are not “making our own rules” if new traditions are started after biblical times and we are giving them the same reverence as Scripture and Tradition of biblical times?
Answer

We need to distinguish between traditions and Tradition with a capital “T.” All churches have traditions. But sacred Tradition is a direct expression of the authority Jesus gave to the apostle Peter and his successors. For over a century there was no New Testament. What was taught was oral Tradition. The faithful, like us today, had to rely on the authority Jesus gave to the leaders of the Church and their successors. It was that authority that eventually compiled the New Testament, discerning which books to include and which not. Whatever the Church teaches, it is bound to fidelity to sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture. This is why it cannot sanction anything it chooses but only that which is in accord with what it has been given: e.g., prohibiting the use of anything but grape wine and wheat bread for the Eucharist.

Answered by: Fr. Vincent Serpa O.P.

Why don’t Catholics just rely on the Bible and not their man-made traditions?

There were nearly three decades between the Crucifixion and the first books of the New Testament and nearly eight decades between the Crucifixion and the last of them. Two generations at least were deprived of the Book of Revelation, surely one of the most critical of the books of the Bible. Many Christians already had gone to their deaths for the sake of Christ, but had never heard the words of Paul, for the simple reason that Paul had not yet written them. Indeed, at least one Christian died as a direct and intended consequence of Paul himself: Stephen. Are we then to exclude Stephen from salvation because he was unaware of Paul’s writings not yet written?

All the teachings of the apostles are “traditional” teachings, not “written”—“Traditional” in the radical (root) sense of the term, from the Latin “tradere,” to hand over (not “down” as so many have it—nor does the idea of “trade,” also derived from that verb, enter into it implying some exchange of one sort or another), simply the passing along from one to another. The Bible is the written portion of Tradition, as is amply evidenced by John himself at the very end of his Gospel, where he says that “many other things did Jesus do and say, so many, I think, that if they were all written down the world itself would not be large enough to hold the books that would have to be written to hold them.” Even taken in their most gentle sense, those words inescapably mean that in no way can the Bible be taken as the complete record of everything Jesus did, said, or taught.

Most of the beliefs and practices that Fundamentalists condemn among Catholics are rooted in Sacred Tradition, the unwritten portion; though I also must make certain that it is understood that no Tradition, however longstanding, may contradict Scripture.

Revelation is of a piece; it is not a patchwork quilt, from which we pick and choose those things that please us or which may threaten us less. Salvation and revelation are a package deal—they go together, and we accept all or none.

Answered by: Fr. Hal Stockert

 

[eamonnroma]

By receiving the Eucharist at a Catholic Mass you are declaring you believe all the Church holds true. If you cannot do that, you cannot receive unless you wish to violate your conscience, and we cannot ask you to do that.

That is not quite true - there are instances when non RCCs can receive communion. If a Christian who believes in the real presence (such as the Orthodox) genuinely is unable to attend his own Church, and freely requests to receive he is able to do so. This is an unusual and exceptional instance - but that Christian is not required to believe all that the RCC teaches.

 

[eamonnroma]

Lutherans don’t believe in the adoration of the Eucharist as does catholic church.

If you mean by adoration, reserved sacrament, exposition, benediction etc, the Orthodox Churches do not have the tradition of adoration.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

In other words, a man made law.

You mean from the same men (using men in the generic sense as members of the Church) who gave you the Bible?

You seem to accept that the Holy Spirit ‘used’ members of the Catholic Church (there were no Protestant churches in AD 380) to, under His guidance, discern the authenticity of Sacred Scripture.

Why are you having trouble with the same Church now? Obviously you must believe that something ‘went wrong’ with the One Church (and it was obviously One, and obviously VISIBLE, when the canon of Scripture was put in place). Please tell us exactly what went wrong to make this entire Church ‘rejected’ and which Church took its place to have, as Scripture clearly tells us, the authority of the Spirit to guide it and the power to ‘bind and loose’. When did the Holy Spirit REMOVE His guidance from the Catholic Church?

 

[Graceful_Lamb]

So you’ll be joining the Catholic Church soon then, since your denominational traditions are not important and do not affect your salvation.

I didn’t say that my denominational traditions are not important and don’t affect my salvation. I said that loving your neighbor as yourself is MORE important than denominational traditions. I did NOT say that the traditions were not important at all.

As for joining the Catholic church, I have researched the church. It is comments such as what is quoted above that play a part in me not wanting to join. This isn’t the first time that I have seen something along lines of joining the church because I have made a comment that someone seems to think that would indicate that I want to join.

 

[eamonnroma]

No, Jesus is only present is the consecrated Host by an ordained Catholic priest.
The devil can testify this in any exorcism for he flees away!

Only an ordained RCC priest?

 

[eamonnroma]

The eastern Rite Churches, such as Greek Catholic, Byzantine Catholic, Melkite, Maronite, etc are NOT in schism with Rome. They are in full communion with Rome, and we Roman Catholic are able to take the eucharist in those churches. i’m not sure where your ideas come from but the Eastern Rite churches are in FULL communion with Rome. The orthodox are a different story,but the Vatican is working on a restoration of both sects of orthodoxy and Catholism.

The Orthodox Churches are not sects.

 

[eamonnroma]

No, it was a schism, of valid RCs. Who retained, per the RCC, valid orders.

The Old Catholic Church still exists.

 

[eamonnroma]

Thorolf…and yet such joint communions are not actualized in the universal church…I stated mine I experienced Christ’s presence upon the calling of His words…but we Catholics believe in transubstantiation where the Lord ministers us directly from heaven with His body and blood…

How I understand it, Lutherans do not understand or accept transubstantiation. And so we are both partaking with somewhat different intent and understanding…

Neither do the Orthodox use the word Transubstantiation. Neither did the RCC for many centuries. The word is merely trying to explain what we cannot explain.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Neither do the Orthodox use the word Transubstantiation. Neither did the RCC for many centuries. The word is merely trying to explain what we cannot explain.

Thank you. That was beautifully stated.

 

[Michael68]

In other words, a man made law.

Are you referring to the man made law of sola scriptura?

 

[Michael68]

I read the article you posted and my response is probably the standard Protestant response. I don’t have a problem with traditions, we all have them whether we realize it or not right? Where in the New Testament do Jesus or the apostles condone traditions or doctrines that don’t conform to Scripture? It seems to me they do just the opposite. The Catholic Church holds to traditions, doctrines and dogmas etc. that do not conform to Scripture.

Thanks

According to who?

 

[Nyika]

I don’t think you read the article carefully.

I say this in all charity, to correct your perceptions

First it needs to be said

• The Catholic Church is Divinely instituted by Jesus Matthew 16:18. He is the one who said I will build my Church" His Church is NOT the invention of man nor is it manmade nor the tradition of men. The Catholic Church is here “in writing” from the beginning. #34 (lots of internal links there, please open them for context).
• The Church of Rome is Peter’s see. And Peter is over the entire Church worldwide, not just parts of it, ALL of it. It was there before Paul wrote Romans (his letter to the Church of Rome). The Catholic Church wrote the NT scriptures. You heard me right. Everyone who wrote NT scripture, was already in the Church they were writing to and for. The Catholic Church then, collected and canonized her books, and gave the 1st bible to us. It is the same Church that’s here today, and as Our Lord said, not even the gates of hell will prevail against it.
• It is the same Church where pope Francis is at the helm, 267th successor to St Peter’s see in Rome.

So what “seems to you” by looking back with Protestant lenses, at history and Tradition, long before your own Protestant tradition was even invented, your assessment is NOT accurate nor is it biblical…

• Protestantism is a 100% man made tradition. It’s not divinely instituted. It’s based on dissent and division, started in the 16th century by dividing from the only Church Our Lord established on Peter and gave all His promises to.
• In full disclosure, I have to tell you that, scripture condemns that.
• Where you ask? From the Greek NT διχοστασίας* dichostasia** = divide / dissent / cause factions, sedition, sects, Note that the same Greek word διχοστασίας dichostasia * appears in the following scriptures.
• Romans 16:17-20 , [17] Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who make dissensions διχοστασίας* dichostasia * and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them. [18] For they that are such, serve not Christ our Lord, but their own belly; and by pleasing speeches and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent. [19] For your obedience is published in every place. I rejoice therefore in you. But I would have you to be wise in good, and simple in evil. [20] And the God of peace crush Satan under your feet speedily.
• Galatians 5:19-21 . [19] Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, immodesty, luxury, [20] Idolatry, witchcrafts, enmities, contentions, emulations, wraths, quarrels, dissensions, διχοστασίας* dichostasia * sects, [21] Envies, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God

Note: the consequences to that sin? shall not obtain the kingdom of God. IOW one won’t be going to heaven. i.e. division from the Church is condemned, as are those who knowingly do it or knowingly maintain it.

Also note

• there is no expiration date to that warning.
• iow, That warning is as valid when Paul taught it, as it is today, and forever.

With that in mind, maybe reread that article again