 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
brian
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Chicago South Burbs, Illinois USA |
| Posts: | 720 |
| First Name: | brian | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | methodist, evangelical, anglican, catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 10th, 2006 02:07 pm |
|
I understand that one of the reasons that Catholics see other churches as not having the real presence in communion being that they do not have apostolic succession with the Holy Orders being passed down the right way.
My question is why this fact keeps their sacrament of communion invalid but somehow the church acknowledges that they can have valid sacraments of baptism and marriage. Why is it that the apostolic succesion is necessary for the person to grant some sacraments but unnecessary for others? My guess is that the nature of the eucharist is that it is a sacrifice or a perpetuation of the original sacrifice so therforre it is a sacrament that like the Jews requires that there be a priest there to administer to it and one who is in line with a priesthood whose authority exists from the time of Peter and the apostles. But this still confuses me a little.
Brian
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 4971 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 10th, 2006 02:35 pm |
|
brian wrote: My question is why this fact keeps their sacrament of communion invalid but somehow the church acknowledges that they can have valid sacraments of baptism and marriage. Why is it that the apostolic succesion is necessary for the person to grant some sacraments but unnecessary for others?
It has to do with the understanding of who is the proper minister of the sacrament. Anyone may baptize in case of necessity. Jesus gave us all the "Great Commission" to baptize all people. It is a discipline of the Church that only the deacon or priest is the ordinary minister; in fact, anyone, even a non-Christian, may validly baptize as long as they use the proper form.
In marriage, the Roman Catholic Church considers the spouses the ministers. Through their exchange of vows, they administer the sacrament on each other. The priest or deacon acts as the Church's official witness, not as the minister of the sacrament. That's why, with prior permission of the bishop, a Catholic may be validly married by a Protestant minister or a judge even if a Church witness is not present. This is most often permitted when the minister or judge is a close family member. It is more common to have the marriage take place in a Catholic Church in the presence of the priest, and to have the relative preside over the exchange of vows.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Incognito
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 27th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 19 |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 27th, 2006 07:55 pm |
|
But if it is God the Holy Spirit who transforms the element in the epiklesis, why then would not any ordain pastor in apostolic succession (at least as a sequence of the hands of episkopoi) validly offer up that prayer, and thus we receive, as we believe, the Body and Blood of Christ, which "we do indeed munch with our teeth" as Luther put it in his usual crass fashion.
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 4971 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 27th, 2006 08:35 pm |
|
Incognito wrote: But if it is God the Holy Spirit who transforms the element in the epiklesis, why then would not any ordain pastor in apostolic succession (at least as a sequence of the hands of episkopoi) validly offer up that prayer, and thus we receive, as we believe, the Body and Blood of Christ, which "we do indeed munch with our teeth" as Luther put it in his usual crass fashion.
Any ordained pastor validly in apostolic succession can indeed transform the elements. This includes priests in the Catholic, Orthodox and Oriental Christian traditions, as well as priests of the Assyrian Church of the East and the Polish National Church. By virtue of their ordination, they have the power to stand in the place of Christ who truly pronounces the words of consecration.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Incognito
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 27th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 19 |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 27th, 2006 08:41 pm |
|
You don't add the Anglicans nor the Lutherans. The latter at least hold to Real Presence (NOT consubstantiation), though, like the EO, they do not adopt Aristotelian terminology to explain hoc est. And there is no Lutheran pastor (at least not in the confessing synods) which was not ordained by two bishops, and on back through the archbishop and bishops who followed the evangelical movement of the Augsburg Confession even after 1523.
So.. . we -believe- we are truly receiving Christ's body and blood into our mouths, but you say that we are not? That would be awful, if true.
Well, I should cease posting under the influence of an incipient headache for the moment.
|
|
|
JillD
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Visalia, California USA |
| Posts: | 597 |
| First Name: | Jill | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | heathen, EvFree, Messianic, LC-MS, Catholic 2007 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 27th, 2006 08:53 pm |
|
I've been a member at an LCMS Lutheran church for about 5 years. One of the ways I feel that the church shows its belief in the change into the true Body and Blood is by the way that it treats the elements during and especially after Communion. The difference between the reverence that the Lutherans I've seen and the Catholics in terms of this reverence is huge.
Admittedly, this was at the more liberal ELCA branch of Lutheranism, but we went to a Christmas Eve service on Sunday evening. The Words of Institution were said over the bread and wine, and then the pastor held the paten of bread and a woman held the chalice and people lined up, a lot of them teenagers who were laughing and fooling around. They each took a wafer and then they dipped it in the wine and then popped it in their mouths. Many whose mouths still contained the elements stopped to jest with and hug friends in the front row pews. I was about to climb out of my skin. (We did not partake at this service. Not even my Lutheran family.)
At my church, leftover consecrated wine is kept until the next week. I believe that the bread is, too. It's simply put in a cupboard along with the vestments and hymnals and whatnot.
To me, this is not the practice of a church that takes seriously their belief that these elements are the true Body and Blood of Christ.
Jill
____________________
"The alternative to obedience is to turn the conversation into a cacophony of Christians making it up as they go along." - Fr. Richard John Neuhaus
|
|
|
Ruthie
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 13th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houston, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 99 |
| First Name: | Ruthie | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | nominal Presbyterian, aetheist, evangelical Christian/Episcopalian, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 27th, 2006 10:11 pm |
|
Incognito,
Anglicans do not have valid apostolic succession. Never did. They rejected Rome when Henry VIII made himself the head of the Church of England. It wasn't until the 1800s though that this was declared by the Catholic Church.
However, Anglicans do believe they have Apostolic Succession but they are incorrect.
My simplistic answer, but it's a fact.
Rick, where are you? I know you have the answers to all this.
Ruthie
____________________
Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it. (NRSV, Luke 18:17)
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 4971 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 28th, 2006 12:28 am |
|
Incognito wrote: You don't add the Anglicans nor the Lutherans.
No, I don't. They did not maintain legitimate authority with the patriarch of their church, the pope. The Orthodox and Oriental Churches left communion with Rome, but not with their patriarchal see. Since the earliest days of the Church, only the patriarch has had the proper authority to authorize the ordination of bishops. So when ever a bishop was ordained without the explicit approval of the patriarch, apostolic succession was broken and the sacraments of that church became invalid. It happened in the Anglican communion, it happened with the Lutheran church, and it is happening today with the official church of China. The fact that the ordaining bishops are validly ordained themselves is irrelevant.
And the fact that they claim apostolic succession and believe they have the Real Presence does not make it so.Last edited on Thu Dec 28th, 2006 12:32 am by CajunRick
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Incognito
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 27th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 19 |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 28th, 2006 01:05 am |
|
Jill, I wish I could just say "that's elka for ya" but I've seen LCMS kids way out of line, too. Difference is, they get corrected pretty quickly. But we do treat the Body and Blood of our Lord very carefully. What is left, Pastor distributes to the home-bound and those in the hospital, and then consumes the rest. Neither the Body and the Blood, nor baptismal water is just dumped. Ever. Not even palm branch ashes are so treated.
Rick,
They weren't really given the option. And apparently, the bishop of Rome is no longer patriarch. (which is confusing: so who is?)
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 4971 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 28th, 2006 01:10 am |
|
Incognito wrote: They weren't really given the option. And apparently, the bishop of Rome is no longer patriarch. (which is confusing: so who is?)
They had the option to remain faithful to the Church but once they rejected her authority and doctrines, they separated themselves from the Body of Christ. And the pope is still patriarch of the west. He has merely stopped using the title because it is redundant.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
heardclarke
Member
| Joined: | Mon Apr 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | Dallas Area, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 197 |
| First Name: | Lisa | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | cradle Episcopalian; confirmed RC Easter 2005 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19th, 2007 08:34 am |
|
Dear friends,
If you are in doubt as to whether the Anglicans believe their eucharist and holy orders are the same as ours, you can read the 39 Articles in the back of their prayer book. (I cannot speak for the Lutheran church.) Those 39 Articles specifically state that the sacrament is not to reserved, carried about, or displayed to the faithful as Christ's Body and Blood. There are some "Anglo-Catholics" who ignore this directive; and many Episcopalians have never read the Articles and certainly don't imagine that their instructions are binding for all of them. However, this inattention does not make them more Catholic, just more careless.
It also states that there are 2 primary sacraments in their tradition: baptism and the eucharist. The problem is, as I read somewhere before, "Anglicans think that they have the Eucharist because they think they have Apostolic succession. Roman Catholics believe that they have Apostolic succesion because they have the Eucharist." (I think I read this in First Things a few weeks ago).
Or, as the previous rector at dh's "traditional" Rite I parish said a few months ago, "Apostolic succession? Nobody really thinks about that anymore." Looking at their recent track record I would have to agree that he seees to speak for most of 'em.
Lisa
____________________
Ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est.
|
|
|
Annie
Member
| Joined: | Wed Feb 14th, 2007 |
| Location: | Columbus, Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 718 |
| First Name: | Annie | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | nothing, Quaker, Mennonite, Presbyterian, Methodist, Anglican, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 19th, 2007 10:49 am |
|
Here is a really good nitpicking article with a really good nitpicking letter at the about what Lutherans really believe about the Eucharist:
http://mb-soft.com/believe/text/transub.htm
So note, just because Lutherans choose not to call what they believe "consubstantiation" doesn't mean it isn't consubstantiation.Last edited on Thu Jul 19th, 2007 10:51 am by Annie
____________________
Annie
Ora et labora
|
|
|
Current time is 08:03 am | |
|
|
|
|
|
