Who has the valid Sacraments?

[Albion]

Could you get me more information on the blasphemous pizza and coke liturgy and where it happened?

What I did was ask "what if" when speaking of weird substitutes for bread and wine.

But I also said this wasn't just hypothetical, meaning that something like this did actually take place in a "mod" worship service I remember reading about years ago where similar elements were used.

Unfortunately, when I did an online search I could not find a report on that particular service or church, although I did chance upon the report I linked the previous post (#80) to, which frankly surprised me when it indicated that using other substances isn't something that might happen only rarely and in a very unusual parish.

 

[Strong in Him]

well, who else decrees whether sacraments are valid?

That's the thing; if believers were to celebrate communion at home, passing round bread and wine amongst themselves instead of in a church with ordained clergy present and all the formal eucharistic liturgy, I don't think clergy would recognise that as valid and say that it was a communion service. I haven't heard anyone saying during lockdown; "if you're missing not being able to get to a communion service, just celebrate it on your own at home". The Methodist church has a service for "Spiritual communion" where it says "although we are not taking bread and wine ..." - yet why shouldn't we eat bread and drink wine/juice while reading that?

It does seem that, in many traditions, it's the presence of ordained clergy that "validates" the elements and declares that something is a Eucharist.
I don't believe that it makes any difference to God.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I enjoy history a lot, so your information here was very insightful.

Thank you for that.

I will ask a question.

Why do you think the Jewish holidays are not celebrated in Christian religion, since they all speak of the Lord.

Because the Apostle St. Paul writes,

"Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ." - Colossians 2:16-17

The Torah was given to the Jews as part of God's special covenant with them which He made at Mt. Horeb, a covenant not for any other people except the Jews (Deuteronomy 5:1-5, Psalms 147:19-20). A covenant that also existed to point toward the new covenant of Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20, Jeremiah 31:31-34), and since we have a new covenant the old is no longer relevant (Hebrews 8:13).

Since Christians have the freedom of conscience before God on matters of food, drink, days of observance, etc; the Church never enforced the old holy days since they had reached their point in Jesus. Instead Christians observed specifically Christian things.

Rather than the Jewish Passover Christians instead began to celebrate their own specifically Christian version of Passover, calling it by the same name (Pascha), and is still celebrated by Christians throughout the world every year. In the English-speaking world the Great Paschal Feast is often called "Easter".

In addition to this, Christians began--through the use of their God-given Christian freedom of conscience--to set aside various times of the year and days to the honor of Christ. So the honor given to Christ's Epiphany--His appearing and revealing we see glimpsed between His birth and His baptism in the River Jordan by John the Baptist, would become the Christian observances of Epiphany (also called Theophany) and the Holy Nativity (aka Christmas). As the years of persecution continued to grow, and many lost their lives to death by martyrdom, the memories of Christian saints began to be celebrated in various places. Like birth days, but rather than honoring the birth of the saint it instead remembered the day of their death and "birthday" into God's presence. These "saints feast days" along with the emerging Christian days of observing the Lord's birth, life, death, resurrection, and ascension, sending of the Holy Spirit, etc (Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Passion Week, Pascha, Pentecost, etc) over time became more consistent among Christian congregations in the same geographical regions, and regular Christian calendars emerged. Such calendar consistency aided in Christians fellowshiping and worshiping together in unison across the known world, celebrating and rejoicing in God's saving work in the world by sending His beloved and only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

Hence why we have Christian holidays.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[fhansen]

Hi, HT.

I did find that document to be interesting, but only as it explains what the RCC has decreed or decided with regard to other Christian churches. The thinking that lies behind the decisions is "something else."

Three items caught my attention.

1. The validity of the sacraments depends on whether or not there is valid Apostolic Succession. No surprise there. But it's purely arbitrary on the part of the RCC.

She could just almost as well have decreed that a different list of churches was okay after choosing them randomly.

But there's some interesting sloppiness also. For instance, there is not just one Anglican church body in the world with a single line of Succession. But they or it or whatever Rome thinks Anglicanism is are on the outs. Meanwhile, the Nestorians are quite okay.

2. The document is intended for church leaders dealing with the important matter of training candidates for church membership. As we see in the document, the insulting term "ecclesial communities" (referring to other denominations) appears in it. For anyone who tries to say that this practice is not common and certainly not engaged in by people in leadership in the RCC, that's refuted here.

3. The "Masons" are on a list with some churches whose baptisms are considered by Rome to be invalid. The Masonic organizations, as is no secret, are not a religion, however, and do not perform any baptisms, Christian or otherwise.

While I have no idea of the source of this document, apparently being a privately authored summation of Church positions, it is accurate as far as I can tell. As to Anglican succession the CC doesn’t recognize it in any Anglican churches, and, incidentally, Eastern Orthodoxy also hold to a similar position regarding succession. “Ecclesial communities” is a valid enough concept when acknowledging the fact that there can only be one Church, established by Christ, that we all descend from and which Protestants are in one manner or another separated from. The Catholic Church, for its part, does recognize true faith and Christian teachings in most of those groups, many of which don’t care much about sacraments anymore to begin with. And Masons do perform baptisms

 

[Root of Jesse]

Wait a second, are you saying a Cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church baptized someone in the name of Jesus, Mary and Joseph? Wouldn’t that automatically defrock and excommunicate him under the canon law? Because while I have serious gripes about liturgical abuses in the RCC, I have never heard of anything that shocking. I mean, that’s literally baptizing someone in the name of God and two humans, instead of in the names of the three divine persons of the Trinity. It is objectively worse than Creator/Redeemer/Sustainer, as bad as that is. As you know I am not anti-Catholic; I loved Pope Benedict XVI and were he still in power or replaced by someone like him I probably would have converted.

to clarify, the cardinal was the one baptized in the name of Jesus, Mary and Joseph. Since his baptism was invalid, all the sacraments he performed were invalid. He got properly baptized, which corrected all the other sacraments he performed.

 

[Albion]

While I have no idea of the source of this document, apparently being a privately authored summation of Church positions, it is accurate as far as I can tell.

It isn't accurate, at least so far as what I pointed to goes, but the document t may not be as official as it looks, that's true.

At the same time, my pointing to a couple of somewhat surprising errors really shouldn't be interpreted by any reader as some kind of "fighting words." There's too much of that online already.

 

[Ligurian]

Because the Apostle St. Paul writes,

"Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ." - Colossians 2:16-17

Galatians 2:7-9... So, since Paul was sent to the gentiles, the gentiles must have had food laws, etc., against which he was preaching.

But Peter was sent to the circumcision, as were all the Galilean Apostles... and so, these words apply:

Esaias 66:1 Thus saith the Lord, Heaven is My throne, and the earth is My footstool: what kind of a house will ye build Me? and of what kind is to be the place of My rest? 2 For all these things are Mine, saith the Lord: and to whom will I have respect, but to the humble and meek, and the man that trembles at My words? 3 But the transgressor that sacrifices a calf to Me, is as he that kills a dog; and he that offers fine flour, as one that offers swine’s blood; he that gives frankincense for a memorial, is as a blasphemer. Yet they have chosen their own ways, and their soul has delighted in their abominations. 4 I also will choose their mockeries, and will recompense their sins upon them; because I called them, and they did not hearken to Me; I spoke, and they heard not: and they did evil before Me, and chose the things wherein I delighted not. ... 17 They that sanctify themselves and purify themselves in the gardens, and eat swine’s flesh in the porches, and the abominations, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the Lord.

Matthew 15:12 Then came His disciples, and said unto Him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying? 13 But He answered and said, Every plant, which My heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. 14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. 15 Then answered Peter and said unto Him, Declare unto us this parable. 16 And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? 17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? 18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. 19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: 20 These are [the things] which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

In other words, dirty hands don't defile a man, but unclean thoughts do. Because food doesn't just pass harmlessly through the body... but apparently dirt does.

 

[.Jeremiah.]

You do realize that in the Orthodox Churches they refer to the feast of the resurrection, which we call Easter, as Pascha, meaning Passover, and that is the more ancient usage? In fact, the Greeks and others eat lamb ceremonially on Pascha Sunday.

Also, Pentecost is a Jewish holiday which the Christian Church still celebrates. Indeed Eastern Orthodox churches and Jewish synagogues are decorated with massive amounts of greenery on that feast.

I did not know these things.

I appreciate your information immensely.

 

[.Jeremiah.]

Passover is the precursor to the Passion, Death and Resurrection of Jesus. So we celebrate those during Holy Week.

I see, that makes sense.

Thank you for that.

 

[.Jeremiah.]

Because the Apostle St. Paul writes,

"Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ." - Colossians 2:16-17

The Torah was given to the Jews as part of God's special covenant with them which He made at Mt. Horeb, a covenant not for any other people except the Jews (Deuteronomy 5:1-5, Psalms 147:19-20). A covenant that also existed to point toward the new covenant of Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20, Jeremiah 31:31-34), and since we have a new covenant the old is no longer relevant (Hebrews 8:13).

Since Christians have the freedom of conscience before God on matters of food, drink, days of observance, etc; the Church never enforced the old holy days since they had reached their point in Jesus. Instead Christians observed specifically Christian things.

Rather than the Jewish Passover Christians instead began to celebrate their own specifically Christian version of Passover, calling it by the same name (Pascha), and is still celebrated by Christians throughout the world every year. In the English-speaking world the Great Paschal Feast is often called "Easter".

In addition to this, Christians began--through the use of their God-given Christian freedom of conscience--to set aside various times of the year and days to the honor of Christ. So the honor given to Christ's Epiphany--His appearing and revealing we see glimpsed between His birth and His baptism in the River Jordan by John the Baptist, would become the Christian observances of Epiphany (also called Theophany) and the Holy Nativity (aka Christmas). As the years of persecution continued to grow, and many lost their lives to death by martyrdom, the memories of Christian saints began to be celebrated in various places. Like birth days, but rather than honoring the birth of the saint it instead remembered the day of their death and "birthday" into God's presence. These "saints feast days" along with the emerging Christian days of observing the Lord's birth, life, death, resurrection, and ascension, sending of the Holy Spirit, etc (Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Passion Week, Pascha, Pentecost, etc) over time became more consistent among Christian congregations in the same geographical regions, and regular Christian calendars emerged. Such calendar consistency aided in Christians fellowshiping and worshiping together in unison across the known world, celebrating and rejoicing in God's saving work in the world by sending His beloved and only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

Hence why we have Christian holidays.

-CryptoLutheran

Yes, I agree completely with what you say.

Paul’s words make total sense in how I would see it.

 

[The Liturgist]

I did not know these things.

I appreciate your information immensely.

Liturgics, which is the study of Christian worship, is my main area of interest, and its an absolute pleasure to talk to people about it and introduce them to the beauty of the ancient traditions of Christian worship. I would love to PM you to answer any questions you might have and provide some interesting information. Also, in the Traditional Theology subforum there are several interesting threads on worship including one I just posted about liturgical beauty

 

[Albion]

I haven't heard anyone saying during lockdown; "if you're missing not being able to get to a communion service, just celebrate it on your own at home". The Methodist church has a service for "Spiritual communion" where it says "although we are not taking bread and wine ..." - yet why shouldn't we eat bread and drink wine/juice while reading that?

It does seem that, in many traditions, it's the presence of ordained clergy that "validates" the elements and declares that something is a Eucharist.
I don't believe that it makes any difference to God.

However, the sacraments have apparently always been understood to be congregational events, not only personal. Priests in the RCC may not say Mass alone, for instance.

The symbolism is present in the liturgical churches, but even denominations that don't believe in sacraments, calling them 'ordinances' and saying that they are only something we do in order to show God something or other...want confessions of faith to be made before the whole congregation.

And they bring their children to the church for the denomination's substitute for Baptism, a "dedication" service. It's done in front of the assembly.

Why don't they routinely do all of these things just with the family in the living room?

 

[Before and Evermore]

I have to reply that that's incorrect. What's more, the Anglican churches differed from the RCC no more than the EOC did and does.

But if it had been correct, the point I made about the document we read would still stand. It shows us that the RCC doesn't use an accurate and consistent standard when declaring some church bodies to have valid sacraments and others not.

Anglicans "Reformed" meaning they made a conscious effort to change their theology. There is a difference between knowing the truth and having a different perspective on it after generations vs making radical changes to what was previously believed.

 

[Root of Jesse]

However, the sacraments have apparently always been understood to be congregational events, not only personal. Priests in the RCC may not say Mass alone, for instance.

Not exactly. A priest must say Mass daily, and during lockdown often did say Mass alone. Private Masses are not allowed, I'm pretty sure.

The symbolism is present in the liturgical churches, but even denominations that don't believe in sacraments, calling them 'ordinances' and saying that they are only something we do in order to show God something or other...want confessions of faith to be made before the whole congregation.

Yes, the intention of the Mass must be for more than just a private matter.

And they bring their children to the church for the denomination's substitute for Baptism, a "dedication" service. It's done in front of the assembly.

Why don't they routinely do all of these things just with the family in the living room?

 

[.Jeremiah.]

Liturgics, which is the study of Christian worship, is my main area of interest, and its an absolute pleasure to talk to people about it and introduce them to the beauty of the ancient traditions of Christian worship. I would love to PM you to answer any questions you might have and provide some interesting information. Also, in the Traditional Theology subforum there are several interesting threads on worship including one I just posted about liturgical beauty

Thank you for that.

You may PM me anytime.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Galatians 2:7-9... So, since Paul was sent to the gentiles, the gentiles must have had food laws, etc., against which he was preaching.

But Peter was sent to the circumcision, as were all the Galilean Apostles... and so, these words apply

There is neither Jew nor Greek in the Church of Jesus Christ. There are only Christians.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Ligurian]

Galatians 2:7-9... So, since Paul was sent to the gentiles, the gentiles must have had food laws, etc., against which he was preaching.

But Peter was sent to the circumcision, as were all the Galilean Apostles... and so, these words apply:

Esaias 66:1 Thus saith the Lord, Heaven is My throne, and the earth is My footstool: what kind of a house will ye build Me? and of what kind is to be the place of My rest? 2 For all these things are Mine, saith the Lord: and to whom will I have respect, but to the humble and meek, and the man that trembles at My words? 3 But the transgressor that sacrifices a calf to Me, is as he that kills a dog; and he that offers fine flour, as one that offers swine’s blood; he that gives frankincense for a memorial, is as a blasphemer. Yet they have chosen their own ways, and their soul has delighted in their abominations. 4 I also will choose their mockeries, and will recompense their sins upon them; because I called them, and they did not hearken to Me; I spoke, and they heard not: and they did evil before Me, and chose the things wherein I delighted not. ... 17 They that sanctify themselves and purify themselves in the gardens, and eat swine’s flesh in the porches, and the abominations, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the Lord.

Matthew 15:12 Then came His disciples, and said unto Him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying? 13 But He answered and said, Every plant, which My heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. 14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. 15 Then answered Peter and said unto Him, Declare unto us this parable. 16 And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? 17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? 18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. 19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: 20 These are [the things] which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

In other words, dirty hands don't defile a man, but unclean thoughts do. Because food doesn't just pass harmlessly through the body... but apparently dirt does.

There is neither Jew nor Greek in the Church of Jesus Christ. There are only Christians.

-CryptoLutheran

Romans 15:8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

Philippians 3:2 Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision. 3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

Acts 11:25 Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul: 26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

Galatians 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

Acts 22:4 And I persecuted this Way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women. Acts 26:10-11 Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against [them]. And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled [them] to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted [them] even unto strange cities.

Matthew 23:34-35 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and [some] of them ye shall kill and crucify; and [some] of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute [them] from city to city:

Matthew 24:14 And this Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

 

[pescador]

Thinking about the OP some more... I find the wording offensive. The idea implies that there are supposed to be both valid and invalid sacraments. I believe that all sacraments done in faith are valid. All of them!

 

[The Liturgist]

Thinking about the OP some more... I find the wording offensive. The idea implies that there are supposed to be both valid and invalid sacraments. I believe that all sacraments done in faith are valid. All of them!

And I believe you are mistaken, because our Lord defines the sacraments clearly, and in the case of Matthew 28:19, tells us how to do Baptisms specifically (which is one sacrament anyone can perform, if there is need). If someone uses different words in their baptism, or doesn’t baptize with water, it is not valid.

 

[pescador]

And I believe you are mistaken, because our Lord defines the sacraments clearly, and in the case of Matthew 28:19, tells us how to do Baptisms specifically (which is one sacrament anyone can perform, if there is need). If someone uses different words in their baptism, or doesn’t baptize with water, it is not valid.

So when John the Baptizer was baptizing people in the Jordan River it wasn't valid? When he baptized Jesus and didn't use the formulaic words in Matthew 28 it wasn't done properly? Of course, God the Father though it was correct so who is right, you are God?

Matthew 3:15-17, "Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented.

As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”