Protestant Communion?

[steve_b]

Father David,

Is Jesus to be found in Protestant Communion? We cannot say “Yes” with any certainty … but it is not possible to say no with the same certitude.

We know with certainty that Jesus in present in the Eucharist because of the ministerial priesthood and the promises and command of Christ at the institution of the Priesthood and the Eucharist at the Last Supper. As a Catholic I believe this to the core of my being and have experienced the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist in my life. I attend Mass to be fed, to join with my faith family in the Eucharistic Feast, to worship our Lord and Savior, to be strengthened for the journey.

However, truly it is not possible to say with the same certainty that Christ is not present in any non-Catholic Communion on any given day because the God - Father, Son and Holy Spirit can be present anywhere and in any form they choose … even in the Methodist [or any other denomination] down the Street … I would not seek Christ in the Eucharist there because of their lack of the apostolic Church and apostolic ministerial priesthood and their very beliefs regarding Communion - but I have no doubt that if Jesus desires to feed and nourish that faith community with His Body and Blood in their Communion - He - by the power of the Holy Spirit - unaided by a validly ordained priest can make that a reality …

Christ instituted the Church - The Church has to operate according to God’s will - The Church cannot teach other then the Good News

However, God can and does what He wills - unconstrained by the Church or any man - whether ordained priest or lay -

in support of what Fr David said, I offer the following

(All emphasis mine))

Excerpt

…A Mother who gives us the faith, a Mother who gives us an identity. But the Christian identity is not an identity card: Christian identity is belonging to the Church, because all of these belonged to the Church, the Mother Church. Because it is not possible to find Jesus outside the Church. The great Paul VI said: “Wanting to live with Jesus without the Church, following Jesus outside of the Church, loving Jesus without the Church is an absurd dichotomy.” And the Mother Church that gives us Jesus gives us our identity that is not only a seal, it is a belonging. Identity means belonging. This belonging to the Church is beautiful………Think of this Mother Church that grows, grows with new children to whom She gives the identity of the faith, because you cannot believe in Jesus without the Church. Jesus Himself says in the Gospel: " But you do not believe, because you are not among my sheep." If we are not “sheep of Jesus,” faith does not come to us. It is a rosewater faith, a faith without substance. And let us think of the consolation that Barnabas felt, which is “the sweet and comforting joy of evangelizing.” And let us ask the Lord for this “parresia”, this apostolic fervor that impels us to move forward, as brothers, all of us forward! Forward, bringing the name of Jesus in the bosom of Holy Mother Church, and, as St. Ignatius said, “hierarchical and Catholic.” So be it.
news.va/en/news/pope-mass-on-feast-of-st-george-full-text
(see all links bottom of page)

in addition, then Card Ratzinger head of the doctrine of faith under JPII wrote

Excerpt
“…to be a Church the community must be “legitimate”; they are legitimate when they are “united with their pastors”. What does this mean? In the first place, no one can make a Church by himself. A group cannot simply get together, read the New Testament and declare: “At present we are the Church because the Lord is present wherever two or three are gathered in His name”.The element of “receiving” belongs essentially to the Church, just as faith comes from “hearing” and is not the result of one’s decision or reflection. Faith is a converging with something I could neither imagine nor produce on my own; faith has to come to meet me. We call the structure of this encounter, a “Sacrament”. It is part of the fundamental form of a sacrament that it be received and not self-administered. No one can baptize himself. No one can ordain himself. No one can forgive his own sins. Perfect repentance cannot remain something interior—of its essence it demands the form of encounter of the Sacrament. This too is a result of a sacrament’s fundamental structure as an encounter [with Christ]…”
from ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFECCV2.HTM

Jesus never contradicted Himself. He never said it is okay to break with Peter. His will is John 17:20-23

We can’t ignore all the condemnations in scripture against those who divide or who choose to remain divided from Our Lord’s Church.

 

[KjetilK]

And who will determine the objectivity of these historical facts? who will sift through them and then say…these are the objective historical facts?

Historians, perhaps?

And to make those applicable…a declaration has to be made…so the question…who will make that declaration?

Anyone with the ability to assess historical facts and documents.

Actually…I have not made an assumption of some sort. If the question was asked of me…then I would answer accordingly.

Your question pressupposes that historical facts need to be declared right by some kind of authority to be acceptable.

The question is posited to you…but from your response, you already have a built in bias and animosity over one man.

Such as?

Let us assume the answer is indeed Rome…so what is bad about that? Do you think Rome would lead you to hell?

No, I just don’t think that Rome (or the Roman Pontiff to be exact) has universal authority over the Church.

Or you just have an intense dislike for Rome?

No. Why the need to psychologize my points?

You made an assumption…I have claimed nothing. Here is what I asked…

You are asking me to answer a historical question in a manner not historical.

It became Lutheran at that point…borned of the rejection of Rome. It became disjointed.

And the east became Byzantine at some point. So what?

Again, a difference…the Russian OC cab trace their line from the apostolic founder.

And the same goes for the Scandinavian churches. The bishops continued.

Yours, as far as I know, are traced through Rome…so when you broke off…you broke your apostolic line.

Here you are in direct contradiction to the teaching of your own Church, as has been shown by Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p. 458.

But in schism…correc?

That depends on many things: (1) Who instigated the schism? (2) Who cast out Luther? (3) Does Rome have universal jurisdiction?

And which apostolic line did your bishop get his orders from?

Well, they got them first from the british bishops who travelled to Norway alongside the kings, in the late 10th century, early 11th century. They may have gotten them from Rome. But so what? Remember that Rome follows the tradition from Augustine, not the tradition from Cyprian.

And where did the Byzantines get their orders from? Byzantium wasn’t founded by an apostle.

If the Old CC conducted joint consecrations…in disobedience to Rome…do you think this is a good thing?

If Rome has universal jurisdiction, then it would be bad. If not, there is no disobedience to speak of. Many people probably think it is bad to drink Coke. I wouldn’t say, though, that you or I would be disobedient if we drank it. The very concept of obedience presupposed an authority to which obedience is due. So the fact that you even use the term shows that you beg the question, assuming the universal authority of Rome as a premise in the discussion.

 

[YADA]

in support of what Fr David said, I offer the following

(All emphasis mine))

Excerpt

…A Mother who gives us the faith, a Mother who gives us an identity. But the Christian identity is not an identity card: Christian identity is belonging to the Church, because all of these belonged to the Church, the Mother Church…

in addition, then Card Ratzinger head of the doctrine of faith under JPII wrote

Excerpt

 

[IGotQuestions]

I don’t know very much about Lutherans, I didn’t mean for this to drive a wedge between Catholics and Protestants.
My original question was:

Is Christ Spiritually Present in Protestant Communion?

With the emphasis on the word ‘spiritual’.
Thank you!

 

[KjetilK]

If the Old CC conducted joint consecrations…in disobedience to Rome…do you think this is a good thing?

If Rome has universal jurisdiction, then it would be bad. If not, there is no disobedience to speak of. Many people probably think it is bad to drink Coke. I wouldn’t say, though, that you or I would be disobedient if we drank it. The very concept of obedience presupposed an authority to which obedience is due. So the fact that you even use the term shows that you beg the question, assuming the universal authority of Rome as a premise in the discussion.

Allow me to elaborate a bit on this.

Yes, the Old Catholics did accept the practical authority of Rome prior to 1870 (or before in some case), as England or Germany now accepts the practical authority of the European Union in Brussels, or Norway (which is not a member of that union) now accepts the practical authority of the European Economic Area trade agreement.

The Old Catholics, however, rejected the practical agreement when Rome, in 1870, claimed more authority than she actually had, just as any country in the European Union may withdraw from that union. The same goes for churches. The pope is the Patriarch of the West, even though that title has been scrapped, and patriarchs don’t have any supreme authority over a bishop or an archbishop. If they do, then the episcopacy is a joke, just as England’s national supremacy would be a joke if they couldn’t leave the EU.

What remains now is for you to actually show why the Roman Pontiff has supremacy, and why this doesn’t make the episcopacy into a joke.

 

[steve_b]

.

But you are speaking of different things then if Jesus can be present in the Communion offered in a Protestant Church …

Yes - The Church is an institution of Christ - we are members of her …I never said that we were not nor said there was an equivalence between other Christians and the Catholic Christian.

What Father implied and what I believe is not true is that Jesus can only become present in Bread and Wine through the action of a validly ordained Priest … I agree that Jesus instituted the ministerial priesthood and the Eucharist … but Jesus can act - as High Priest independently of the Church and its Priests … or would you limit God’s action …

Here is what the pope said

“.“It is not possible to find Jesus outside the Church…A Mother who gives us the faith, a Mother who gives us an identity. But the Christian identity is not an identity card: Christian identity is belonging to the Church, because all of these belonged to the Church, the Mother Church. Because it is not possible to find Jesus outside the Church. The great Paul VI said: “Wanting to live with Jesus without the Church, following Jesus outside of the Church, loving Jesus without the Church is an absurd dichotomy.” And the Mother Church that gives us Jesus gives us our identity that is not only a seal, it is a belonging. Identity means belonging. This belonging to the Church is beautiful………Think of this Mother Church that grows, grows with new children to whom She gives the identity of the faith, because you cannot believe in Jesus without the Church. Jesus Himself says in the Gospel: " But you do not believe, because you are not among my sheep.” If we are not “sheep of Jesus,” faith does not come to us. It is a rosewater faith, a faith without substance. And let us think of the consolation that Barnabas felt, which is “the sweet and comforting joy of evangelizing.” And let us ask the Lord for this “parresia”, this apostolic fervor that impels us to move forward, as brothers, all of us forward! Forward, bringing the name of Jesus in the bosom of Holy Mother Church, and, as St. Ignatius said, “hierarchical and Catholic.” So be it."
news.va/en/news/pope-mass-on-feast-of-st-george-full-text
Y:

Would you tell God who is saved and who is not? Would you tell God He could not speak to a non Catholic Christian? Would you tell God He could not move a mountain?

Are you legitimizing all those who divide, or are divided from Our Lord’s Church? Look at what Jesus said through Paul about those who divided from Our Lord’s Church

This Greek word διχοστασίας dichostasia = division / dissension / factions /sedition, sects is used in the following 2 selections.

Romans 16:17-20 (links operational)
[17] Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who make dissensions διχοστασίας ] 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. The

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 ] 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.

IOW they who do such things go to hell

Those are not my words, but from Jesus
Y:

Christ can and does work outside the construct of the Church … the Church is dependent upon God but God does not depend upon the Church to exist or function … God entrusted the Church to teach the Good News of Salvation - Specifically - our salvation is through the Church - the Church cannot teach that all ways are equal or that there are a multitude of ways to reach everlasting life … but God can work outside the Church - God can save outside of the Catholic Church …

Now - most Protestant denominations do not believe their Communion is anything more then symbolic. I can know that too. Some Christians believe it is - some don’t …All those things are knowable if one inquires … - Their belief cannot make it so …
…

Bottomline, the Holy Spirit teaches only what comes from Jesus John 14:25-26 , John 16:12-15. And Jesus doesn’t lead people into divisions, confusions, and heresy. Satan does that.

 

[Elizium23]

What remains now is for you to actually show why the Roman Pontiff has supremacy, and why this doesn’t make the episcopacy into a joke.

I am afraid that none of the actual Catholics on this site have the ability to maintain a reasonable debate with a self-proclaimed “Catholic” Protestant who believes that Catholic bishops are “a joke”.

 

[KathleenGee]

About the pope having universal authority over the Church … he does but in communion with the bishops…

His authority has always been one that awaits the response of the bishops…the papacy is the head pastor…and likewise the papacy hears grievances of his bishops…golng back and forth…the Church more as a living organism… within our set framework of beliefs.

 

[eamonnroma]

Would the American Catholic Church (ACCUS) be regarded as catholic or protestant? Their communion would be valid?

 

[MaryT777]

I am afraid that none of the actual Catholics on this site have the ability to maintain a reasonable debate with a self-proclaimed “Catholic” Protestant who believes that Catholic bishops are “a joke”.

The Lutheran confessions teach the Pope sits in the seat of the AntiChrist.
Of the Antichrist
43.As to the Antichrist we teach that the prophecies of the Holy Scriptures concerning the Antichrist, 2 Thess. 2:3-12; 1 John 2:18, have been fulfilled in the Pope of Rome and his dominion. All the features of the Antichrist as drawn in these prophecies, including the most abominable and horrible ones, for example, that the Antichrist “as God sitteth in the temple of God,” 2 Thess. 2:4; that he anathematizes the very heart of the Gospel of Christ, that is, the doctrine of the forgiveness of sins by grace alone, for Christ’s sake alone, through faith alone, without any merit or worthiness in man (Rom. 3:20-28; Gal. 2:16); that he recognizes only those as members of the Christian Church who bow to his authority; and that, like a deluge, he had inundated the whole Church with his antichristian doctrines till God revealed him through the Reformation — these very features are the outstanding characteristics of the Papacy. (Cf. Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 515, Paragraphs 39-41; p. 401, Paragraph 45; M. pp. 336, 258.) Hence we subscribe to the statement of our Confessions that the Pope is “the very Antichrist.” (Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 475, Paragraph 10; M., p. 308.)

The comment that the bishops could be a joke is no surprise given the Poster and his theology.

It might seem that K already thinks he is a Catholic expert. The CCC speaks of universal jurisdiction, the validity of Protestant Sacraments etc. I for one am not interested in trying to ‘prove’ to this poster what is already glaringly obvious. It’s his prerogative to reject it. I do find it odd that he cares so much what “Rome thinks” How strange

Most clergy I know are busy with pastoral duties and don’t have much time to spend on internet message boards of another Faith. How bizarre to me.

I agree any real dialogue is not possible in the sense of Prove this and Prove that type of mentality.

That said this poster tying to prove he has valid orders and sacraments shows a deep seated longing for the truth and perhaps he will be led to it someday. I can’t imagine anyone that satisfied in a pastoral role posting such nonsense on a board of another Faith.

Mary
Church of the "Pope of Rome and a part of his “dominion.”

 

[JonNC]

The Lutheran confessions teach the Pope sits in the seat of the AntiChrist.
Of the Antichrist
43.As to the Antichrist we teach that the prophecies of the Holy Scriptures concerning the Antichrist, 2 Thess. 2:3-12; 1 John 2:18, have been fulfilled in the Pope of Rome and his dominion. All the features of the Antichrist as drawn in these prophecies, including the most abominable and horrible ones, for example, that the Antichrist “as God sitteth in the temple of God,” 2 Thess. 2:4; that he anathematizes the very heart of the Gospel of Christ, that is, the doctrine of the forgiveness of sins by grace alone, for Christ’s sake alone, through faith alone, without any merit or worthiness in man (Rom. 3:20-28; Gal. 2:16); that he recognizes only those as members of the Christian Church who bow to his authority; and that, like a deluge, he had inundated the whole Church with his antichristian doctrines till God revealed him through the Reformation — these very features are the outstanding characteristics of the Papacy. (Cf. Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 515, Paragraphs 39-41; p. 401, Paragraph 45; M. pp. 336, 258.) Hence we subscribe to the statement of our Confessions that the Pope is “the very Antichrist.” (Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 475, Paragraph 10; M., p. 308.)

The comment that the bishops could be a joke is no surprise given the Poster and his theology.

It might seem that K already thinks he is a Catholic expert. The CCC speaks of universal jurisdiction, the validity of Protestant Sacraments etc. I for one am not interested in trying to ‘prove’ to this poster what is already glaringly obvious. It’s his prerogative to reject it. I do find it odd that he cares so much what “Rome thinks” How strange

Most clergy I know are busy with pastoral duties and don’t have much time to spend on internet message boards of another Faith. How bizarre to me.

I agree any real dialogue is not possible in the sense of Prove this and Prove that type of mentality.

That said this poster tying to prove he has valid orders and sacraments shows a deep seated longing for the truth and perhaps he will be led to it someday. I can’t imagine anyone that satisfied in a pastoral role posting such nonsense on a board of another Faith.

Mary
Church of the "Pope of Rome and a part of his “dominion.”

Father K is a priest in the Church of Norway which, AFAIK, subscribes to the Augsburg Confession and the Small Catechism only. The Smalcald is then irrelevant regarding him.

Jon

 

[MaryT777]

Father K is a priest in the Church of Norway which, AFAIK, subscribes to the Augsburg Confession and the Small Catechism only. The Smalcald is then irrelevant regarding him.

Jon

I’m sure he has fond wishes for the Pope then…

 

[steido01]

I don’t know very much about Lutherans, I didn’t mean for this to drive a wedge between Catholics and Protestants.
My original question was:

Is Christ ***Spiritually ***Present in Protestant Communion?

With the emphasis on the word ‘spiritual’.
Thank you!

According to Catholics, or according to Protestants? The answer to each depends entirely on “which Protestants?”

Lutherans believe Christ is present in their Communion not only physically, but also Really Present. While Catholics would deny that Lutheran pastors are capable of confecting a true Eucharist, it would seem Catholicism does acknowledge that *something *happens at the Lutheran Communion, at least according to Pope Benedict XVI: weedon.blogspot.com/2007/01/most-interesting-statement.html

 

[Nyika]

Please can you give me some examples of other Christian groups who report miracles?

 

[Nyika]

I don’t think that anyone (Catholics included) can actually prove that Jesus is present in their Eucharist/Communion. It’s all a matter of faith. So we are all free to believe what we want even if none of us can prove it.

Extract below from Church News Bulletin with reference to Matthew 28:16-20

‘We may be shocked that the disciples could doubt even in Jesus’ presence. But it should also console us.
Doubt helps us ask questions and helps our faith to grow. It is healthy, it is sometimes necessary; it reminds us of the mystery of God. Those who claim they know for certain, surely have no room for growth. We know that the disciples learned and grew and faced many challenges along the way. It was a very human journey. And so it is for us. Jesus offers us the assurance that he is with us always, even when doubt clouds our vision. We donot emerge the other side unchanged. Doubt can sometimes help our faith; it keeps our mind open, our hearts searching and can bring us to a new point if we allow it.’

 

[KjetilK]

I am afraid that none of the actual Catholics on this site have the ability to maintain a reasonable debate with a self-proclaimed “Catholic” Protestant who believes that Catholic bishops are “a joke”.

I said no such thing. I said that the Roman Catholic position runs the risk of making mockery of the episcopacy. If the bishop doesn’t have episcopal authority, he is no bishop.

In the Orthodox Church, the main patriarch (of Constantunople) doesn’t have any direct authority over the other patriarchs and bishops.

So the challenge remains: The Catholics need to show how the direct and universal jurisdiction (not just primacy, but supremacy) of the Roman Pontiff is compatible with the real power and authority of the bishop.

The Lutheran confessions teach the Pope sits in the seat of the AntiChrist.

No, they do not. There is some documents which some claim are ‘Lutheran confessions,’ but they have never been universally accepted in the Lutheran tradition. The core of Lutheranism qua Lutheranism is the Augsburg Confession and the Small Cathechism.

It might seem that K already thinks he is a Catholic expert.

Yes, it’s always a good sign that people have to turn to ‘interior analysis’ to ‘explain.’

The CCC speaks of universal jurisdiction, the validity of Protestant Sacraments etc. I for one am not interested in trying to ‘prove’ to this poster what is already glaringly obvious.

What is ‘glaringly obvious’ is that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that catholicity is present wherever you have a Church with a apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist. That is my point in this thread. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[punisherthunder]

No they do not. They believe in it as more of a “in memory of” concept that is only really done at Easter or so.

Added, some sects of Protestantism mock the Catholic interpretation of transubstantiation. I have been to more than one Protestant church were the pastor screamed and called Catholics “cannibals” much to the delight of the crowd.

 

[JustaServant]

No they do not. They believe in it as more of a “in memory of” concept that is only really done at Easter or so.

Added, some sects of Protestantism mock the Catholic interpretation of transubstantiation. I have been to more than one Protestant church were the pastor screamed and called Catholics “cannibals” much to the delight of the crowd.

You’ve been in some pretty crazy churches.
I try to avoid crazy people.
They certainly do not represent all Protestants.

 

[MaryT777]

No they do not. They believe in it as more of a “in memory of” concept that is only really done at Easter or so.

Added, some sects of Protestantism mock the Catholic interpretation of transubstantiation. I have been to more than one Protestant church were the pastor screamed and called Catholics “cannibals” much to the delight of the crowd.

The more Protest-ants doth protest, the more Blessed I feel for the gift and treasure of my Catholic Faith and my savior Jesus Christ our Lord, the Church he founded as the pillar and foundation of truth.

Mary.

 

[JonNC]

The more Protest-ants doth protest, the more Blessed I feel for the gift and treasure of my Catholic Faith and my savior Jesus Christ our Lord, the Church he founded as the pillar and foundation of truth.

Mary.

I give thanks for the blessings you receive there.

Jon