Monday, April 16, 2018

A NONSENSICAL COMMENT IN THE POPE'S CHRISM MASS LEADS AN ACADEMIC THEOLOGIAN TO POST AN ARTICLE ON THE VALIDITY OF THE EUCHARIST IN BOTH CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT VERSIONS OF IT--WHAT IS LEFT OUT IN THE ARTICLE IS BREATHTAKING BUT TYPICAL OF THE PROGRESSIVE MIND THAT THINKS NONSENSICAL THINGS!

Amphigory 

Definition of Amphigory (noun) : Nonsensical writing (usually verse).  Nonsense is a synonym of  amphigory. Sometimes you can use "Nonsense" instead a  noun"Amphigory". 
Synonyms for Amphigory
Synonyms for amphigory
   

Nonsense 

Definition of Nonsense (noun) : Language, behavior, or ideas that are absurd and contrary to good sense. Amphigory is a synonym of  nonsense. Sometimes you can use "Amphigory" instead a  noun "Nonsense". 
Synonyms for Nonsense
Praytell's Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB has a nonsensical article on the possible convergence and validity of the communion services, thus, the Holy Communion of Protestant denominations and all based on a nonsensical statement by Pope Francis at the Chrism Mass. Here it is and I won't summarize the nonsensical things Fr. Anthony puts forth based on this dumb comment by Pope Francis, but you can read it at Praytell by pressing the following nonsensical paragraph:

“We must be careful not to fall into the temptation of making idols of certain abstract truths. They can be comfortable idols, always within easy reach; they offer a certain prestige and power and are difficult to discern.”

Don't get me wrong, I believe God's grace is experienced by our seperated brethren in their so-called worship services. Even their "communion" services provide some experience of grace, but by default and out of God's unconditional love.

However, no matter how a Protestant celebrates a communion service, even the highest Anglican denomination which has an expression of the liturgy that looks almost exactly like the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, the Most Holy Eucharist, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is absent, not present, and completely null and invalid.

Why? Not because a particular denomination or even congregation believes what the Catholic Church believes about the Mass and the Most Holy Eucharist, not because it resembles the Catholic Mass and some of our teachings on the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, but because Protestants, all of them, unlike the simply schismatic Eastern Orthodox Churches, do not have a valid priesthood which is essential for the validity of the Mass and the doctrine of the Most Holy Eucharist. Case closed.

If you want Protestants to have a valid Eucharist, they need first a valid Sacrament of Holy Orders, a valid Episcopate and priesthood. They, unlike the schismatic Eastern Orthodox Churches, don't have that as they renounced the Sacrament of Holy Orders, reducing them to two ordinances, Baptism and Communion.

Praytell and Fr. Anthony, who are you kidding! You get an "F" for an article so dumb!

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

And just what makes for a "valid Episcopate?" As for the number of sacraments, there was not always agreement in the undivided Church as to how many there were, and even in the Episcopal Church, there is acknowledgement of "sacramental rites", like confirmation and anointing of the sick. Even the Eastern Orthodox Church, which acknowledges 7 sacraments, acknowledges two that are pre-emininent---Baptist and Eucharist.

Your statement about the "simply schismatic" Eastern Orthodox Church gets to the point of why it is basically a stalemate when it comes to reunion. Each side believes the other is schismatic (some Eastern Orthodox would claim the Roman Church even is heretical, with invalid orders). So, for both sides to unite, one side would have to admit "we were wrong" back in 1054---which is about as likely as Chicago hitting 90 degrees today.

Bret said...

Father McDonald,
Please excuse this off topic comment, but I thought you might like to do a blog post about this renovation at Our Lady of Czestochowa parish in Sterling Hts MI. This is the before pic of the altar:
https://cmvic.net/pictures/2015/6/OLC.jpg

and this is the after:
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30707066_10212019853034893_8516586714637273316_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=1c0e3c32eaaed6f4cf305753fea1b6cb&oe=5B66801C

As you can see, the tiny wood altar and ambo have been replaces with larger marble and gold ones, communion rails have been installed, the tabernacle has been moved from the side to the center. The enclosure beneath the crucifix opens up to reveal the painting of Our Lady of Czestochowa that was simply exposed constantly before the renovation.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Thanks Bret, quite an improvement!

Bret said...

More pics of the renovation can be found on their FB page:
https://www.facebook.com/wanda.chircop/posts/10212019856674984

On some, you can see the new Stations of the Cross have not been installed yet, as the old tiny wood ones are place in the new, large frames.

Dan said...

Ah but those same "limited conceptual resources" mentioned in "Gaudete et Exsultate" must have misled previous generations of Catholics into thinking there actually is a difference.

Or at least this is how I perceive things will play out, and not just for inter-communion, but for everything else that is being pushed.

TJM said...

The first photo looks like a toy box, the second like a sanctuary

Anonymous said...

Some perspective on the sacraments from an Eastern Orthodox perspective:

"Only in the 17th century, when Latin influence was at its height, did this list (number of sacraments) become fixed and definite. Before that date, Orthodox writers vary considerably as to the number of sacraments: John of Damascus spoke of two; Dionysius the Areopagite of dix...and those Byzantine theologians who in fact speak of seven sacraments differe as to the items which they include in their list. Even today, the number seven has no absolute dogmatic significance for Orthodox theology, but is used primarily as a convenience in teaching.

"Those who think in terms of 'seven sacraments' must be careful to guard against two misconceptions. In the first place, while all seven are true sacraments, they are not all of equal importance, but there is a certain 'hierarchy' among them. The Eucharist, for example, stands at the heart of all Christian life and experience in a way that the Anointing of the Sick does not....In the second place, when we talk of 'seven sacraments', we must never isolate these seven from the many other actions in the Church which also possess a sacramental character, and which are conveniently termed sacramental...(such as) rites for a monastic profession (and) the great blessing of waters at Epiphany..."

(From Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church, first published 1963

Anonymous said...

One more Eastern Orthodox perspective for the day:
"The number of the sacraments is often referred to as seven, but this has never been formally decided by an Ecumenical Council. In the patristic tradition, sometimes more and sometimes less than seven are counted as sacraments. But all have the common feature that they use material and spiritual means to manifest our membership in the Lord's Kingdom and our communion with Him. The seven most frequently mentioned, however, are Baptism, Chrismation, Eucharist, Repenteance...as well as Marriage, Ordination and Unction."

--The Orthodox Church, 455 Questions and Answers (Stanley Harakas, 1987).

Thus in Eastern Orthodoxy, there does not seem to be any dogmatic insistence on 7 sacraments. However, like Rome, Orthodoxy would be critical of how Protestantism (with the exception of Anglicanism) substituted the pulpit for the altar in terms of worship emphasis. Today, only the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and Anglicanism offer communion every Sunday (though in the latter, not necessarily at every Sunday service, but at least at one of them).