Protestants: How do you determine which denomination holds the truth?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jon_S_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dronald said:
So why does the CC claim “once a Priest, always a Priest” even while laicized?

It seems the Orthodox do not claim, “once a Priest, always a Priest”
Click to expand...
You are misinformed or over simplified.

The Catholic Church would say that his ordination from God remains, but he is not a priest and cannot function as a priest.

It’s like saying once a Levite always a Levite. If laicized He may no longer work and function as a levitical priest but he remains in a Gods chosen people group.
 
Jon_S said:
Your right. The same church that declared Arius a heretic for denying the Trinity declared many of these other notions heresy as well. It is just now people choose to follow the schismatic and the falsehood of heresy since they refuse to allow the church to shepherd them.
Click to expand...
People chose then also to follow their apostolic succession/ordained yet schismatic or excommunicated bishops/presbyters, way before Luther. Also be careful to to place guilt by association. That is because they got the trinity wrong doesn’t mean they got everything else wrong. I would take one issue at a time for their time. Today I would weigh getting the trinity wrong much more heavily.
 
SyroMalankara said:
What is “priest” - “offerer of sacrifices”. A “defrocked”/“laicized” is not to do this. The only speculation is whether he “can”, the answer is, it depends.
Click to expand...
Yes, and propitiatory sacrifices ended with OT and you won’t find “heirus” (Greek for priest) for church office anymore, as you did in OT. You find presbyteros, with good reason . Why try and translate it back to “priest”, washing away the difference between heirus and presbyteros ?
 
dronald said:
So why does the CC claim “once a Priest, always a Priest” even while laicized?

It seems the Orthodox do not claim, “once a Priest, always a Priest”
Click to expand...
Neither claim “once a priest, always a priest”, that’s not doctrine, dogma or discipline, just a layman’s simplistic jingle. I could easily claim “once a dad, always a dad”, but its not that simple is it?
 
benhur said:
Yes, and propitiatory sacrifices ended with OT and you won’t find “heirus” (Greek for priest) for church office anymore, as you did in OT. You find presbyteros, with good reason . Why try and translate it back to “priest”, washing away the difference between heirus and presbyteros ?
Click to expand...
I don’t know what you are referring to here at all. The Greek Church has presbyteros, priest is English form.

Your claim that “propitiatory sacrifices ended with OT” is unfounded. Christ is the perpetual propitiatory sacrifice. His Sacrifice of Himself is valid and perpetual until the Second Coming, when it is not ended, but even more fulfilled.
 
Publisher said:
I could not be Catholic/Orthodox/Mormon/Lutheran/ Anglican or any body that requires me to undergo a ritual done by someone else to or for me in order to share in His Life. If another man is required to perform a ritual for or to me, that places them in between me and God…/and I need no ones "intervention " to make sure the right words or right gestures are done in order for me to approach God.
Click to expand...
So… no baptism, eh?
 
Jon_S said:
You are misinformed or over simplified.

The Catholic Church would say that his ordination from God remains, but he is not a priest and cannot function as a priest.

It’s like saying once a Levite always a Levite. If laicized He may no longer work and function as a levitical priest but he remains in a Gods chosen people group.
Click to expand...
Does ordination from God remain for a Priest in an Orthodox Church according to the Orthodox?
 
dronald said:
Does ordination from God remain for a Priest in an Orthodox Church according to the Orthodox?
Click to expand...
Hopefully an orthodox will answer, but I am sure it varies across a gradient among the different orthodox churches and synods.

These types of disciplines can vary greatly among the Orthodox.
 
Jon_S said:
Hopefully an orthodox will answer, but I am sure it varies across a gradient among the different orthodox churches and synods.

These types of disciplines can vary greatly among the Orthodox.
Click to expand...
Then my answer remains to the following objection:
SyroMalankara said:
Different meanings of what an ordination or sacrament is as well; some protestants think ordination is temporary others permanent; some think an elder is ordained, others not; some say an overseer or elder can be female, others not; etc, etc.
Click to expand...
I’ve already posted a link on what they believe, but yes; confirmation is always a wonderful thing.
 
dronald said:
Then my answer remains to the following objection:

I’ve already posted a link on what they believe, but yes; confirmation is always a wonderful thing.
Click to expand...
I think they would all agree that some grace from the sacrament of Holy Orders remains. What that is and what it means varies.
 
rinnie said:
Not at all. I am not understanding what you are asking on the first line. Please ask again. Thanks:D

The second line I agree 100% Baptism is the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and it does indeed unite us to all become brothers and sisters in Christ, IF it is done in the name of the Trinity of course.

If you are saying in Baptism you do not receive the Holy Spirit then I must disagree with you.
Click to expand...
Of course I’m not. You’re the one that questioned me about the Holy Spirit being poured out in Baptism. It does more than unite us as brothers and sisters. It unites us to Christ. In that, we share in His priesthood.
 
Jon_S said:
I think they would all agree that some grace from the sacrament of Holy Orders remains. What that is and what it means varies.
Click to expand...
Every Orthodox source I have read indicates that they do not believe any grace remains after a priest is removed from office. They are no different than a layman at that point.
 
Per_Crucem said:
Every Orthodox source I have read indicates that they do not believe any grace remains after a priest is removed from office. They are no different than a layman at that point.
Click to expand...
Provide a source.

That is like saying someone who is baptized and walks away from the faith carries no grace in their life from their baptism and time as a Christian.
 
Per_Crucem said:
orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/canon_law/scouteris_priesthood_unity.htm
Click to expand...
I don’t see anything in there about Gods grace being withdrawn from the priest???

For example we receive grace when we pray and worship, if we leave the faith, the grace received still left a change in his soul. It doesn’t go away, it can’t be withdrawn. The same is true in the great grace of sacraments.

Regardless of whether a defrocked priest can or cannot confect a valid but illicit Eucharist, having received a soul changing grace in the sacrament of Holy Orders is not in dispute.
 
Jon_S said:
I don’t see anything in there about Gods grace being withdrawn from the priest???

For example we receive grace when we pray and worship, if we leave the faith, the grace received still left a change in his soul. It doesn’t go away, it can’t be withdrawn. The same is true in the great grace of sacraments.

Regardless of whether a defrocked priest can or cannot confect a valid but illicit Eucharist, having received a soul changing grace in the sacrament of Holy Orders is not in dispute.
Click to expand...
“Despite the fact that the indelible mark theory acquired dogmatic formulation in the Council of Trent,18 in most circles of the Roman Catholic Church, after the Second Vatican Council, the foundational framework of effecient causality and ex opere operato, which gave rise to such an understanding of priesthood, is reckoned as belonging to a bygone age and abandoned for a more dynamic and ecclesiological approach of sacrament.19
It should be mentioned in this connection that as far as we know, no evidence concerning the indelible mark theory can be found in Patristic teaching. On the contrary, the canonical data leave no doubt that a defrocked priest or bishop, after the decision of the Church to take back his priesthood, returns to the rank of the laity. The anathematized or the defrocked are in no way considered to maintain their priesthood.”

The site no doubt takes a stance in contradiction to Catholic declarations made at Trent.

“CANON IV.–If any one saith, that, by sacred ordination, the Holy Ghost is not given; and that vainly therefore do the bishops say, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; or, that a character is not imprinted by that ordination; or, that he who has once been a priest, can again become a layman; let him be anathema.”
 
dronald said:
“Despite the fact that the indelible mark theory acquired dogmatic formulation in the Council of Trent,18 in most circles of the Roman Catholic Church, after the Second Vatican Council, the foundational framework of effecient causality and ex opere operato, which gave rise to such an understanding of priesthood, is reckoned as belonging to a bygone age and abandoned for a more dynamic and ecclesiological approach of sacrament.19
It should be mentioned in this connection that as far as we know, no evidence concerning the indelible mark theory can be found in Patristic teaching. On the contrary, the canonical data leave no doubt that a defrocked priest or bishop, after the decision of the Church to take back his priesthood, returns to the rank of the laity. The anathematized or the defrocked are in no way considered to maintain their priesthood.”

The site no doubt takes a stance in contradiction to Catholic declarations made at Trent.

“CANON IV.–If any one saith, that, by sacred ordination, the Holy Ghost is not given; and that vainly therefore do the bishops say, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; or, that a character is not imprinted by that ordination; or, that he who has once been a priest, can again become a layman; let him be anathema.”
Click to expand...
That does not say anything about the grace incurred on the priest. Read my examples again. I’ve said over and over that what the reception of grace in holy orders MEANS when defrocked VARIES among the churches but they ALL agree that Great Grace is imputed in the sacrament of holy orders.

Can I ask what any of this has to do with the topic of the thread??
 
Jon_S said:
That does not say anything about the grace incurred on the priest. Read my examples again. I’ve said over and over that what the reception of grace in holy orders MEANS when defrocked VARIES among the churches but they ALL agree that Great Grace is imputed in the sacrament of holy orders.

Can I ask what any of this has to do with the topic of the thread??
Click to expand...
I was given an example of how our leaders disagree so I explained that it’s not just Protestants.

If you follow you’ll see someone denying a lot of what I said.
 
dronald said:
I was given an example of how our leaders disagree so I explained that it’s not just Protestants.

If you follow you’ll see someone denying a lot of what I said.
Click to expand...
Of course it’s not just Protestants.

The topic is not about disagreeing.

It is about foundation.

I can go tomorrow and make my own church, call it what I want and become my own leader of a new denomination.

What gives me the authority to do that and to teach people what the Bible means.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top