Valid priesthood, the mass, and a valid Eucharist (among other things)

[havemercy]

Hi

The following are a few quotations from an online conversation I’ve been having with a non-Catholic brother in Christ. I’m having a lot of trouble articulating myself (without sounding cranky) and explaining the faith lately, and I think its good that I’ve come into contact with some things that I don’t understand too well. Things I believe because they are reasonable doctrines that to my understanding have existed since the very beginnings of Christianity – yet I have a hard time explaining them because I don’t understand all of the innerworkings of the faith yet (I reverted just this year from three years of non-denomenational Protestantism).

I’ve come to you for some assistance and hopefully my friend will join in on the conversation here so there doesn’t need to be any copy-paste paraphrasing. The bold type is my writing.

I’ve yet to see why I’m going to Hell, or how exactly I’m not obeying the commands of Christ.

I cannot tell you where you are going, because I don’t know. However, something Jesus said comes to mind … "He who rejects you, rejects me."

---

I’ve been to mass a few times, and I just didn’t care for the vibe I got from the church. It just didn’t do anything for me.

**Sometimes I don’t feel it either, depending on where I go, what the priest is like and what kind of people are attending. But none of that matters to me (though I’ve not always felt this way), nor does it matter AT ALL. We don’t go to church in order to feel good (though I most certainly do afterwards).

We go to worship God and to offer up the sacrifice of the mass. During consecration we are brought into heaven, into eternity, and kneel before the cross with Mary the Blessed Virgin and John the Evangelist – and with each other. The gifts become the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ, completely present under the species of bread and wine. Christ isn’t only spiritually present. We aren’t just to take this as a symbol of what God has done through the Eternal Word. This literally is Jesus Christ, and His Eucharistic Presence cannot be found outside of the One, Catholic and Apostolic Church. What happens in the mass is an essential part of the New Covenant and was prefigured and prophesied by the prophets.

Within Protestantism, you could debate another church as to who has the best worship team, or who has more intellectually stimulating sermons. And you could compare the music in your Church to say that in a Catholic Cathedral and a sermon to a homily. Though music can be sacred, and sermons refreshing, any and all of this pales in comparison to Christ in the Eucharist. I’ve yet to hear a Protestant say “we have a better eucharist!” - not because the Eucharist is the Eucharist, but because they don’t have the Eucharist at all.**

Explain it to me, then, because I always thought the Eucharist was the wine and bread, blood and body business.

Well, do you have a valid priesthood?

**Without a valid priesthood there is no Eucharist, and there are no sacraments. A valid priesthood is one that can trace itself back to the apostles and Christ through the apostolic succession of the Church. This is essential, for Christ did not found a faith [though God reveals the faith to His Church]. He did not found a philosophy. He did not found a book. He founded a church which is the pillar and bulwark of the truth, and he founded it on Peter, whos cathedra is occupied by Benedict XVI currently. It is a priesthood that is true, authentic, real and proper. This is part of the everlasting covenant, the Church (a visible “hierarchical” thing and the mystical body of Christ), typified by Noah’s Ark among other things **

Is that only according to the Church? If it is, saying “because the Church says so” doesn’t work for a non-catholic.

---

We’re in God’s time during the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Read the book of Revelation. We’re at the Lamb’s Supper. And we didn’t have to die to get there! The liturgy we celebrate on earth is a mysterious participation in the heavenly liturgy.

Is that based on Rev. 3:20?

Yes. I am not sure if this is indicated elsewhere (in sacred scripture), though. Tradition is up for grabs. However, the nature of the mass as a mystical and literal sacrifice is highlighted by the sacrificial undertones of Jesus’ words at the last supper, the prophecy in Malachi and some other stuff that we can delve into soon if you’d like (I’m up for an adventure).

That, even when combined with Rev. 3:20 feels like a big stretch to me. Are you saying that attending mass means literally being in Heaven? Wouldn’t you think there’d be some pretty concrete Scriptual foundation for that?

Thanks to those who have read this and to who will be taking part in this thread.
love tony

 

[Church_Militant]

Hey 'Mercy!

You’re not really doing badly, but I see what you mean about articulation.

See if my posts on the Eucharist here help. #'s 1, 2, 4, and 20 in particular. I try…
Pax tecum,

 

[Bobbychuck]

Greetings everyone. Thanks for the link here, Tony.

My issue is not whether the Eucharist is biblical or not, my issue is whether or not Christ was indeed speaking literally about the bread being His body and the wine being His blood. It just seems almost like it’s making a rather large jump to a conclusion to assume that Jesus meant the Eucharist was miraculous. I see it as a time to remember His death on the cross. Thanks in advance for your responses, I appreciate it. I know there’s an awful lot about Catholicism that I don’t know, and I hope to be educated about it here.

I’m also not so keen on arguing, I have a hard time voicing (or typing) out my thoughts in way that makes sense a lot of the time, so I apologize in advance.

 

[Church_Militant]

Greetings everyone. Thanks for the link here, Tony.

My issue is not whether the Eucharist is biblical or not, my issue is whether or not Christ was indeed speaking literally about the bread being His body and the wine being His blood. It just seems almost like it’s making a rather large jump to a conclusion to assume that Jesus meant the Eucharist was miraculous. I see it as a time to remember His death on the cross. Thanks in advance for your responses, I appreciate it. I know there’s an awful lot about Catholicism that I don’t know, and I hope to be educated about it here.

I’m also not so keen on arguing, I have a hard time voicing (or typing) out my thoughts in way that makes sense a lot of the time, so I apologize in advance.

Hey, I understand what you mean. I suggest that you scroll through the thread I linked you to and let “them” argue for you. I suspect it will cover just about everything you have thought and maybe it will help. Also I suggest that you try thr CA Library since there is a wide range of articles there on many of the things that people do not know or don’t understand. This article in particular might make a good start. If I can be of any help at all, please feel free to PM me.
Pax tecum,

 

[Liberian]

Bobby Chuck,

Hello and welcome to the Catholic Answers Forums. I hope you have a blessed and fruitful time here.

While I can appreciate that many people think that taking Jesus’ words at the Last Supper literally is a “large jump,” there is a passage in I Corinthians 11:23-34 that helps us understand that Jesus did indeed mean exactly what He said. Dying from receiving the Eucharist unworthily is pretty strong stuff.

• Liberian

 

[Bobbychuck]

Let’s suppose that Jesus did indeed mean it in a literal sense. Why is it that it needs to be administered by a Catholic priest? Is it just a matter of being a part of Catholic tradition? Or is there Scriptural references to it that I seemed to have just overlooked? Would “administered” be the appropriate term to use there?

And just out of curiosity, where did the term “Eucharist” come from?

 

[Liberian]

Bobby Chuck,

It needs to be consecrated by a Catholic priest–well, a priest with valid holy orders–because otherwise the change from bread and wine to Body and Blood does not happen. Jesus ordained the Apostles (they were the only ones present at the Last Supper with Him) and they ordained successors.

The term “Eucharist” is Greek. I know that “eu” means “good” in Greek and “charism” is (I think) “gift” in Greek. But I am not a Greek scholar and will defer to people who actually know.

• Liberian

 

[Bobbychuck]

Bobby Chuck,

It needs to be consecrated by a Catholic priest–well, a priest with valid holy orders–because otherwise the change from bread and wine to Body and Blood does not happen. Jesus ordained the Apostles (they were the only ones present at the Last Supper with Him) and they ordained successors.

• Liberian

But that change occurs according to what? Catholic tradition?

 

[AnthonyM2]

But that change occurs according to what? Catholic tradition?

According to Scripture, not just tradition. The discourse in John 6:50-70 is pretty explicit, as well as, “This is my Body… this is my blood.” in the synoptics. It’s a literal interpretation of those verses, but it goes back to the Early Church Fathers such as Justin Martyr and others going back to pretty early times making it linked to the time of the Apostles themselves.

 

[Bobbychuck]

And what about the necessity of consecration by a Catholic priest? Again, is it just Catholic tradition?

 

[AnthonyM2]

And what about the necessity of consecration by a Catholic priest? Again, is it just Catholic tradition?

We would say Sacred Tradition, again going back to the Early church fathers (ECF) and tracing back to the Apostles.

 

[Bobbychuck]

What is sacred tradition, specifically?

 

[AnthonyM2]

What is sacred tradition, specifically?

My understanding is that it is Apostolic tradition handed down from the apostles, hence with the authority and from the teaching of Christ Himself, as opposed to “traditions of men.” As St. Paul says, “Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.” ( 2 Thessalonians 2:14 )
Although it’s not always clearly defined or explicit in scripture, the Church can determine it through guidance of the Holy Spirit and by tracing it back to earliest times of orthodox Christian teaching.

(This may need further elaborating but as it is late, I will try again tomorrow, or perhaps others can explain better. Thank you.)

 

[Bobbychuck]

I appreciate it. Thanks a lot for taking the time to respond.

 

[Church_Militant]

What is sacred tradition, specifically?

BC,
These articles may help somewhat.

BTW Eucharist means “thanksgiving”.

Sacred Tradition is one of the three legs upon which the Deposit of Faith rests.

The Bible (w’all 73 books)
Sacred Tradition (Example)
The teaching of the Magisterium as found in the writings of the church over the last 2,000 years. Essentially found here.

These three things together assure that we do not err in our understanding of the Word of God, which is the problem that Catholics have with those outside the church who rely on their own understanding of the Bible alone.

I hope this helps. For a pretty interesting look at essential teachings of the Catholic faith, you might have a look at the new Compendium Catechism of the Catholic Church. I’ll wager that you’ve never seen a church’s “statement of faith” like this before.
May the peace of the Lord be always with you.

 

[freshwind]

Remember also when Jesus explained the Eucharist, He used a comparison to the manna in the desert.
Scripture tells us many couldn’t accept the teaching that this man would give His FLESH to eat, and they left.
Jesus did NOT call them back and say “I was only speaking symbolically”, He let them go.
I also have read some history, and the name escapes me right now, but a Roman historian around the time of the destruction of Jerusalem wrote about the Jews, and made a snide reference to the “Christians” calling them the wierd people who “eat” their God - maybe the earliest non-Christian reference to the Eucharist - within less than a generation of the original event.

 

[Liberian]

Bobby Chuck,

That change occurs as a matter of objective fact. Catholics and some other Christians recognize the change; others generally do not. The Bible speaks of it in I Corinthians 11 where Paul talks about the species being the Body and Blood of Christ.

The necessity of a valid priesthood is a matter of tradition–not just Catholic, but the tradition of pretty much anybody to whom it matters. For example, the Charismatic Episcopal Church apparently went through considerable effort to acquire a valid priesthood.

• Liberian