The Sacraments [Ecumenical]

Catholic Educators ^ | PETER KREEFT

[NYer]

Peter Kreeft teaches at Boston College in Boston Massachusetts. He is on the Advisory Board of the Catholic Educator’s Resource Center.

[thefrankbaum]

Our bodies are not corpses moved by ghosts, or cars steered by angels, but temples of the Holy Spirit.

Amen. Amen. A thousand times, Amen.

[annalex]

If you want to be on the Catholic Theology for non-Catholics list but are not on it already, or if you are on it but do not want to be, let me know either publicly or privately.

Previously posted:

On Salvation Outside the Catholic Church
The Great Heresies
SALVATION PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE
JUSTIFICATION IN CATHOLIC TEACHING
Hermits and Solitaries [Ecumenical]
THE PRIESTHOOD DEBATE
RIGHTEOUSNESS AND MERIT
A Well-Rounded Pope [Ecumenical]
A Monastery to Last 1,000 Years [Ecumenical]
Explaining Purgatory from a New Testament Perspective [Ecumenical]
In the Crosshairs of the Canon [How We Got The Bible] [Ecumenical]
'An Ordinance Forever' - The Biblical Origins of the Mass [Ecumenical]
Beginning Catholic: Church Authority In Scripture [Ecumenical]
Beginning Catholic: Catholic Tradition: Life in the Spirit [Ecumenical]
Christian Atheism
Vatican plea to uncover Virgin Mary and show her breast-feeding baby Jesus
Why do Catholics have to confess their sins to a priest instead of praying straight to God? [Ecu]
Our Times: The Age of Martyrs
The Eucharist - the Lord's Sacrifice, Banquet and Presence
Beginning Catholic: Catholic Morality: Life in Christ [Ecumenical]
Chosen In Him: The Catholic Teaching on Predestination [Ecumenical]

[NYer]

By now, you have probably noticed that when Catholic teachings are explained in clear terms, few contest it; hence lack of response to this thread.

Thank you for you Amen! I ditto it :-)

[PAR35]

His ignorance of Protestant beliefs is astounding. His probably ought to stick to speaking about things he knows about, if any.

[thefrankbaum]

In the interest of Ecumenical discussion, what does he get wrong?

[PAR35]

1)”To Protestants, sacraments must be one of two things: either mere symbols, reminders, like words; or else real magic. “

Obviously ignorant of the Lutheran view (and that held by some Anglicans), and despite claims to the contrary, shows a lack of understanding of the Reformed view.

2.”They believe in creation and Incarnation and Resurrection only because they are in the Bible.”

He needs to read up on Natural Revelation.

3. “some, following Calvin, add that it is an occasion for special grace, a sign and a seal. “

Seems like he never learned this part: “Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements, in this sacrament, do then also, inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally but spiritually, receive and feed upon, Christ crucified, and all benefits of His death: the body and blood of Christ being then, not corporally or carnally, in, with, or under the bread and wine; yet, as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses. WCF XXIX, 5;

“Sacramental Eating of the Lord. Besides the higher spiritual eating there is also a sacramental eating of the body of the Lord by which not only spiritually and internally the believer truly participates in the true body and blood of the Lord, but also, by coming to the Table of the Lord, outwardly receives the visible sacrament of the body and blood of the Lord. To be sure, when the believer believed, he first received the life-giving food, and still enjoys it. But therefore, when he now receives the sacrament, he does not receive nothing. For he progresses in continuing to communicate in the body and blood of the Lord, and so his faith is kindled and grows more and more, and is refreshed by spiritual food.... The body of Christ is in heaven at the right hand of the Father; and therefore our hearts are to be lifted up on high, and not to be fixed on the bread, neither is the Lord to be worshipped in the bread. Yet the Lord is not absent from his Church when she celebrates the Supper. “ Second Helvetic Confession, Chapter 21.

3. “The basic objection Protestants have to sacramentalism is this:...Isn’t it unfair for God’s grace to depend on anything other than his will and mine?

God’s grace doesn’t depend on our will.

[lastchance]

I will be the first to say that it is very hard to cover all Protestant beliefs about any doctrine. There are just so many of them. But Kreeft does get it right for many Protestant denominations.

This is a brief story of his faith upbringing and conversion

http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics/hauled-aboard.htm

[lastchance]

Here is a link to his works. http://www.peterkreeft.com/books.htm

Not bad for such an ignorant man, eh? (sarc)

[thefrankbaum]

In order:

1) Luther, by the way, taught the real presence and something much closer to transubstantiation than most Protestants believe, namely consubstantiation, the belief that Christ’s body and blood are really present in the Eucharist, but so are the bread and wine. Catholics believe the elements are changed; Lutherans believe they are added to.
He recognizes Lutherans' practice - however, such believe does not define the majority of Protestants, does it?

2) Okay, you got me. What do you mean by that? You think people can know of the Resurrection through means other than Scripture?

3) Isn't that exactly what he is saying? As I read it, those confessions say that you can receive grace by the act, as long as you have the required faith. That isn't what Catholics believe.

4) It doesn't? You don't believe that we must choose Christ?

[PAR35]

1. He does later make a pro-forma reference to Lutheran beliefs, after first tossing all Protestants into the same kettle. There does seem to be a total disconnect between his first statement and the latter one, doesn't there?

2. We are taught, “Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence, do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable”.

You don't need the Scriptures to know that there is a God, and Creation; your own senses tell you that. That is General Revelation.

For Salvation, of course, you need more. That is Special Revelation, and it ordinarily comes from what God has taught us through the Scriptures.

3. God's grace isn't dependent on our will, only on His. It is only AFTER He, by His grace, has quickened us, that we have the capability to respond. (See, in context, Eph 2:1, 2:5, Col 2:13, 1 Peter 2:24)(See also Eph 2:8-10).

4. And you left the easiest for last. No.

Legal disclaimer: these comments do not address his views of Catholicism, but in the spirit of the Ecumenic thread, address only his characterizations of protestant views.

[PAR35]

I will be the first to say that it is very hard to cover all Protestant beliefs about any doctrine.

Certainly. There are, for example, 3 distinct views of Communion/Lord's Supper. But it doesn't show good scholarship to make broad generalizations and try to fit all protestants into it.

[thefrankbaum]

1) Yeah, I see what you're getting at. However, you have to admit, it *IS* difficult to discuss the differences between Catholicism and "Protestantism," since the latter consists of numerous groups with mutually exclusive beliefs. However, having a symbolic communion ritual is more prevalent than the views of Luther in the various Protestant denominations, is it not?

2) I think when he said "creation," he meant something along the lines of "creationism." I completely agree with your delineation between General and Special Revelation, and the logical progression from said revelation to Natural and Divine Law.

3) I think you mixed 3 up, since you had used it twice in your original post - your original '3' was regarding the objectiveness of the Eucharistic Sacrifice in Catholic theology, versus the WCF saying grace is imparted during the ritual depending on the internal constitution of the recipient. I'm not sure how your point here applies to that - if it does apply, could you dumb it down for this Cat-lick? ;-)

4) This confounds me, because in your number 3 above, you say "[then] we have the capability to respond." If we have the capability to respond, mustn't we exercise that capability?

[annalex]

Author: Luther, by the way, taught the real presence

PAR35: Obviously ignorant of the Lutheran view

Obviously?

[PAR35]

Obviously?

"To Protestants, sacraments must be one of two things: either mere symbols, reminders, like words; or else real magic.

Since Lutherans don't believe the sacraments are mere symbols, he must be saying that Lutherans think there is magic.

That shows an ignorance of the Lutheran view.

[annalex]

Clearly not, since the author points to the fact that the Lutherans got at least some parts of their sacramental theology right.

For every generic statement about the Protestants there is a denomination for which it is not true. That goes without saying.

[PAR35]

I think you mixed 3 up

I went back and looked. You are correct. If we continue the discussion, I'll yield to your numbering system.

[PAR35]

1. However, having a symbolic communion ritual is more prevalent than the views of Luther in the various Protestant denominations, is it not?

First, we'd need to discount the mainline Protestants for whom the sacrament is pretty much meaningless other than as a comfortable habit.

The Baptists would be the largest of the symbolic crowd, and they've had a large influence on the large 'E' Evangleicals. On the other hand, there has been a lot of recent discussion as to how large the Southern Baptists really are - certainly far smaller than their claimed numbers.

The Lutherans and Reformed are discussed above - and there are a lot of Lutherans in the country.

So I'm not sure I'd concede the 'prevalent' at this point.

2. I don't see much left to debate there.

I have to post and run - I'll get back for the other 2 later.

[thefrankbaum]

Just on 1, since I think we're good on 2:

Well, Anglicanism doesn't really have a fixed teaching on the Eucharist - some certainly teach the symbolic understanding, others don't. So, we can add some of them to the total. And, although I think we'll get into this when you come back, from my vantage point, I'd argue Calvinism teaches the symbolic understanding - however, like I said, that was point 3, so we'll work on that in a bit.

I don't know enough about Presbyterians or Methodists to really have an opinion, but I'd guess they have a more symbolic understanding. And I certainly think "Purpose Driven" groups have a symbolic understanding. Anyway, I look forward to continuing this conversation.