Lastdaysbeliever
Well-known member
It has everything to do with with the presence of Jesus now doesn't it.
Starting a thread on the Lord's Supper for Catholics to read...
- Thread starter Bonnie
- Start date
Lutheranian
Active member
Is Jesus Chris present in the SSPX eucharist?
Nic
Well-known member
Hi Arch, I'll take a stab at it. I don't know if I have an official or right understanding here, but in the proper order of things, the pastor preaches, baptizes and officiates over the Lord Supper as he properly ordained to do by God's gifting of service in that capacity. Before I say anything else, the preached gospel for absolution of sins, baptism for the forgiveness of sins and the Lord's Supper for the remission of sins is the same theme and exact message in different modes of packaging.
These rites and actions don't forbid a non-pastor from doing the same, but it wouldn't be a Mass. Lutherans believe in an orderly service so that would be understood as the pastor performing these tasks in preferred and orderly way. Yet, I preach the gospel so that the hearers may be moved to repentance and reconciliation for the forgiveness of sins and or encouraged and built up in their faith; no pastor necessary. But then again the setting isn't the Divine Service/Mass. I would also baptize for the forgiveness of sins if deemed necessary. The gospel apart from the pastor offers the absolution of sins [yet Catholics deny this forgiveness for their sins apart from their rite of reconciliation]. The reason why I mention these things is that Lutherans understand that the word of God is effective in the department of the forgiveness of sins. Lutherans don't put stock or shouldn't (imo) in their pastor to do something for these acts to be valid and true because they carry the weight, authority of God and his word where these events are performed and embraced. The Lord's Supper is the Lord's Supper because of faith in the word of God doing what it says it can do. Negative example where the eucharist is invalid is where the officiate doesn't believe the right and true doctrine of the Eucharist even though some or more members of the intended recipients may. I'm not sure if that answers your question but that's about as thorough of an answer I feel like putting out there. Maybe some others and their input would be welcomed, can correct, tweak, blast or endorse some or more of what I offer here Thanks for your replies and participation here as with the others present and reading along.
Nic?
Arch Stanton
Well-known member
As far as I know, the Eucharist is provided through the priesthood of Catholic and Orthodox Churches.
Arch Stanton
Well-known member
From your previous posts, I gather anyone can turn the bread into Christ's body.... what about the priesthood?
Lutheranian
Active member
So it's perfectly licit to attend an SSPX church? That's not what the RC currently teaches.
Lutheranian
Active member
All believers are priests. Those called and ordained should be the ones serving communion, for good order.
Arch Stanton
Well-known member
I don't consider SSPX in communion with Christ's Catholic Church.
Arch Stanton
Well-known member
Indeed -- 1 Peter --- The ministerial priesthood is a different priesthood
Lutheranian
Active member
That's irrelevant to whether or not they have a valid but illicit mass.
Lutheranian
Active member
You don't get to invent new priesthoods when convenient.
Arch Stanton
Well-known member
So true -- Christ established one Church and His ministerial priesthood continues through the laying on of hands.
Nic
Well-known member
The laying on of hands is a fine practice. What's dubious in the Roman Catholic notion is some sort of succession. Assemblies are to call their own pastors.
Nic?
Arch Stanton
Well-known member
Lutheranian
Active member
So SSPX priests are legitimate and their mass is valid.
Lutheranian
Active member
Yup. Catholics can't even assure you that their priests are even Catholic in the first place, much less everyone of them going back 2 thousand years.
A priest discovered his baptism was invalid. Its ripple effects bring heartache and confusion to the entire church community
The Archdiocese of Detroit is seeking to contact anyone who may have received invalid sacraments after a priest of the archdiocese learned his own baptism as an infant 30 years ago was invalid.
www.americamagazine.org
Arch Stanton
Well-known member
You are more than welcome to ask that question on the Catholicism board but weren't we talking about 'all believers' having the power to turn bread into Christs body? [ministerial priesthood?]
Nic
Well-known member
Despite my preferences set to view signatures, I can't see anyones.? So perhaps you can clarify in more explicit terms what your signature says? Thank you.
I guess you are free to assert anything, that's often the case where theology is concerned with all of us, sometimes called opinions. One elephant in a room is where popes and councils have contradicted each other. In the RC mind as long as they [presumably] get something right even if the error or heresy lasts for decades, centuries or millennia previously. May God have mercy on all those who died while believing the soup du jour error or heresy of the day. Blood on your church's hands, maybe? I hardly call that any sort of guarantee that your RC church isn't promoting error in any order of magnitude ar any time.
Nic?
Nic
Well-known member
We has others post a bottleneck where everyone that was "calid" had to pass through one individual. And we are talking around the time of the reformation.Yup. Catholics can't even assure you that their priests are even Catholic in the first place, much less everyone of them going back 2 thousand years.
A priest discovered his baptism was invalid. Its ripple effects bring heartache and confusion to the entire church community
The Archdiocese of Detroit is seeking to contact anyone who may have received invalid sacraments after a priest of the archdiocese learned his own baptism as an infant 30 years ago was invalid.