Zone1 Question for Christians.

[Meriweather]

Let me ask you about this consecration that turns the bread and wine into flesh and blood (that can't be discerned physically, only spiritually). Why do I get the distinct impression that you are convinced only a Catholic priest can do it correctly? Would you accept a Protestant minister doing the ritual? Could you even tell if the bread and wine were consecrated incorrectly, or would your faith render the point, and thus the consecration, moot? Can you do the consecration ritual yourself for a congregation? If not, why not? We are all a royal priesthood, after all.

Tradition. This was passed on by the Apostles down through the Bishops (special priesthood) in the early Church. Catholic, Orthodox, Coptic can all trace their religion/faith back to the Apostles and how the Apostles/early Church did things. Protestants trace their ministers back to how Martin Luther, John Calvin, taught and did things. Apostolic, Church tradition can be traced back to the customs of Judaism where certain aspects of faith were done by the priests descended from Aaron and the tribe of Levi. Can I do this? No, as I have not joined and entered into that unbroken line of special priesthood that extends back to the Apostles and thus Jesus Christ. I am a member of the royal priesthood as I am baptized. I am not a member of the special priesthood.

Also consider the following and understand why you get accused of viewing non-Catholics as unworthy, less than or not even in the Body. This comes from the Council of Trent, at the time the Catholic church first stated transubstantiation as official church policy (in 1215, BTW, NOT the early church):

There is no need for formal policy when everyone is in agreement.

 

[hadit]

Tradition. This was passed on by the Apostles down through the Bishops (special priesthood) in the early Church. Catholic, Orthodox, Coptic can all trace their religion/faith back to the Apostles and how the Apostles/early Church did things. Protestants trace their ministers back to how Martin Luther, John Calvin, taught and did things. Apostolic, Church tradition can be traced back to the customs of Judaism where certain aspects of faith were done by the priests descended from Aaron and the tribe of Levi. Can I do this? No, as I have not joined and entered into that unbroken line of special priesthood that extends back to the Apostles and thus Jesus Christ. I am a member of the royal priesthood as I am baptized. I am not a member of the special priesthood.

And that is extra-Biblical. There is no "special" priesthood in the Christian church, only in the Catholic church. There are appointed prophets, deacons, ministers, but not priests because we are all priests. You have to leave the Bible to form a "special" group. Now, you answered the question whether you meant to or not, you do believe the ritual can only be performed by Catholics. You have, however, failed to answer some other questions, namely:

If you partake of communion and the artifacts were not consecrated, would you know it? I say you would not know it, and your faith would give you the same experience as if they were, which renders the consecration unnecessary. If you think you could tell the difference, how would you? Let's say the priest messed up the incantation, would it still be consecrated?

There is no need for formal policy when everyone is in agreement.

Okay, and yet the church felt it necessary to draw a line in the sand after 1,200 years and kick out the door any who disagreed. Are you now going to call me anathema, or are you going to disobey the council? If there was a different edict handed down since then that allows you to associate with believers in Christ who disagree with you, feel free to cite it. Otherwise, you have to admit that Catholic dogma requires you to look down on non-Catholic members of the Body, perhaps not even consider them to be in the Body. You are thus commanded, yes?

 

[Meriweather]

I highlighted the important word. You are commanded by the church (not Scripture, I will point out) to consider me and those like me anathema. How then can you say you don't look down on non-Catholics as "less than", and claim you accept them as full members of the Body? Has there been a subsequent order changing this edict of which I am not aware, or are you disobedient to church authority? It sounds an awful lot like the church drew a line in the sand and kicked people out the door if they disagreed.

Etymology of the word 'anathema' is excommunicated. As you are not a member of the Catholic Church, it doesn't apply to you. It would apply to me if I suddenly declared that the Eucharist was not the body and blood of Christ, but it doesn't apply to you.

Since them 'anathema' has developed other definitions in English, but in Church terminology, it retains the original meaning...excommunication.

 

[Meriweather]

And that is extra-Biblical. There is no "special" priesthood in the Christian church, only in the Catholic church. There are appointed prophets, deacons, ministers, but not priests because we are all priests. You have to leave the Bible to form a "special" group. Now, you answered the question whether you meant to or not, you do believe the ritual can only be performed by Catholics.

No, it is Biblical. Jesus gathered a group for a special ministry--the Twelve Apostles. Consecration of the Eucharist is only performed by Catholic Priests (priests in a special ministry who have been ordained by previous priests, bishops dating back to the Apostles.

Do you believe that a person in any church can walk in and change anything to the way it suits him/her? Everyone can do anything in whatever way it pleases them whenever it pleases them?

 

[Meriweather]

If you partake of communion and the artifacts were not consecrated, would you know it?

I am at the Mass participating in that Consecration, so I would know it. How could I not?

 

[Meriweather]

Let's say the priest messed up the incantation, would it still be consecrated?

What incantation? Do you mean something like if a priest said, "Pontius Pilate took bread in his hands and said, This is my foot?"

 

[Meriweather]

Okay, and yet the church felt it necessary to draw a line in the sand after 1,200 years and kick out the door any who disagreed. Are you now going to call me anathema,

As I said, you are not a Catholic so 'anathema' doesn't even apply to you. For the same reason I would not call you, Mr. President as that doesn't pertain to you either.

 

[Meriweather]

Otherwise, you have to admit that Catholic dogma requires you to look down on non-Catholic members of the Body, perhaps not even consider them to be in the Body. You are thus commanded, yes?

No. All Christians are our brothers and sisters in Christ. All people are children of God. Our command is to love them.

 

[hadit]

Etymology of the word 'anathema' is excommunicated. As you are not a member of the Catholic Church, it doesn't apply to you. It would apply to me if I suddenly declared that the Eucharist was not the body and blood of Christ, but it doesn't apply to you.

Since them 'anathema' has developed other definitions in English, but in Church terminology, it retains the original meaning...excommunication.

Okay, that makes sense. I can see that.

 

[hadit]

No, it is Biblical. Jesus gathered a group for a special ministry--the Twelve Apostles. Consecration of the Eucharist is only performed by Catholic Priests (priests in a special ministry who have been ordained by previous priests, bishops dating back to the Apostles.

Yes, "Apostle" was one of the titles in the early church. "Priest" was not.

Do you believe that a person in any church can walk in and change anything to the way it suits him/her? Everyone can do anything in whatever way it pleases them whenever it pleases them?

I am wondering from whence sprang the idea that, since Jesus is no longer here physically to transform the materials, only a special class of Catholics are enabled to do so. Would you accept a Protestant minister who became convinced that transubstantiation has to happen and started consecrating his own communion and serving it to his flock, or would you insist he had to join the Catholic church for it to be valid?

 

[hadit]

I am at the Mass participating in that Consecration, so I would know it. How could I not?

Okay, so you participate in the consecration, and you can call the priest out if he messes something up. I'm finding this incredible, so I'm pushing at the boundaries. I do need to know, are you aware when the transformation occurs, or do you just have faith that it did and haven't worried about it? I would be excited to see God working a miracle right in front of me.

 

[hadit]

What incantation? Do you mean something like if a priest said, "Pontius Pilate took bread in his hands and said, This is my foot?"

I know I'm describing all kinds of scenarios and don't mean to sound snarky, but say it's his first time and he's nervous, forgets some of the lines, says the wrong words, things like that? Is he strictly bound to a litany, or does he have some leeway as long as he gets the point across? In my observation, Catholics are much more apt to hold someone to strict wording while non-Catholics care less about strict verbal accuracy and more about the heart of the message, trusting God to understand our human lack.

 

[Meriweather]

Yes, "Apostle" was one of the titles in the early church. "Priest" was not.

As both are English words, neither was used in the early Church. The word 'episkopos' was used in the Bible, and is generally defined as 'overseer'. Bishop is a later derivative of it. Apostles were overseers of the Church...or would you disagree with that?

Would you accept a Protestant minister who became convinced that transubstantiation has to happen and started consecrating his own communion and serving it to his flock, or would you insist he had to join the Catholic church for it to be valid?

Did the Protestant minister first become an ordained priest? Did he complete the prescribed studies and was he ordained through the Catholic priesthood as all priests must be in order to perform the liturgy? Or, did the Protestant minister ordain himself and use his own prescribed studies and liturgy?

 

[hadit]

As both are English words, neither was used in the early Church. The word 'episkopos' was used in the Bible, and is generally defined as 'overseer'. Bishop is a later derivative of it. Apostles were overseers of the Church...or would you disagree with that?

Of course not. I am not a fan, however, of using a title that does not delineate a special class of people. We are all priests.

Did the Protestant minister first become an ordained priest?

He is the ordained leader of his flock, equal in authority to the Catholic priest.

Did he complete the prescribed studies and was he ordained through the Catholic priesthood as all priests must be in order to perform the liturgy?

And therein lies the problem. This should not be something restricted solely to the Catholic church. If the leader of a church feels that God is calling him to consecrate the communion artifacts and that they are to become actual flesh and blood, he should be able to do so. Why is the Catholic church special in regard to the consecration? It sounds like you're leaning toward "It's a Catholic thing, nobody else is allowed to do it".

Or, did the Protestant minister ordain himself and use his own prescribed studies and liturgy?

No, he's been ordained pastor by his denomination and has authority equal to a Catholic priest. Let's say he memorized the incantation given by the Catholic priests and studied everything he could get his hands on, then started doing it himself without converting to Catholicism. Would you participate in his service or would you object because the name on the door is not Catholic, and would you be able to tell that the communion wasn't "right"?

 

[Meriweather]

And therein lies the problem. This should not be something restricted solely to the Catholic church. If the leader of a church feels that God is calling him to consecrate the communion artifacts and that they are to become actual flesh and blood, he should be able to do so. Why is the Catholic church special in regard to the consecration? It sounds like you're leaning toward "It's a Catholic thing, nobody else is allowed to do it".

And again, for those leaving the Catholic Church, what do they care? They have decided they can change whatever they want instead of following/adhering to the traditions handed down by the Apostles. It was decided during the Protestant Reformation people can make up their own rules.

Catholics decided to remain with the practices decided by the Apostles.

You are not arguing with the Church. You are arguing that you have just as much right as any Apostle to choose how things will be done. That's not the Church's fight, that's your fight.

 

[Meriweather]

He is the ordained leader of his flock, equal in authority to the Catholic priest.

Authority to whom? Catholic priests are following Christ and the Apostles as closely as they can as they see only Christ as the authority, and Apostolic traditions as as close as we can know the practices of Christ.

 

[Meriweather]

If the leader of a church feels

FEELS... ?

 

[Meriweather]

It sounds like you're leaning toward "It's a Catholic thing, nobody else is allowed to do it".

Catholics don't make up your rules. You left "the Catholic thing" so that you didn't have to follow those traditions. You still don't want to reunite with the Catholic Church; you want to do what you want in your way which is your choice as you have free will.

 

[Meriweather]

Would you participate in his service

I belong to another church. Why would I suddenly decide to go to another? To do things my way?

 

[ding]

Catholics don't make up your rules. You left "the Catholic thing" so that you didn't have to follow those traditions. You still don't want to reunite with the Catholic Church; you want to do what you want in your way which is your choice as you have free will.

He's an apostate? That explains a lot.