Communion at a Protestant church


All 4 ancient Churches, the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Oriential Orthodox Church, and the Church of the East do not allow an ordained man to marry.

But they do allow a married man to be ordained.

So this goes back to at least the 4/5th centuries

The only way (theoretically) a man could marry after seminary is if he didn’t get ordained after seminary and waited to receive the Sacrament of Holy Orders until after he found a wife and married.

Or entered seminary AFTER getting married.

Seminary life (as it currently exists) would be very taxing on a marriage without having a totally different program for married men.

God Bless


It’s because of the new software that Catholic Answers purchased. On the old platform, several human moderators reviewed reported posts and made human decisions.

But the new system has community self regulation. When a post gets flagged x number of times, the computer removes the post automatically. And when a poster receives x number of infraction, the computer automatically issues a punishment based on the type of infractions, etc.

Protests have to be sent to Catholic Answers for a human to review.

It’s not a perfect system, but it allows Catholic Answers to keep the forums instead of eliminating them (which was something they considered when they determined that they could not longer afford to pay their human moderators).

God bless

BTW - I know someone who was banned from
CAF for something like 100 years. That’s obviously not the action of a human moderator, but the result of a computer algorithm.



That’s literally what the Lutheran Confessions do. They draw on the Fathers, the Scriptures, the traditions of the church and plain reason to seek the faith handed down from the Apostles.

But I don’t think this is the place to start a study on the BoC.


I agree. That is one of the worst ideas for confirmation class I’ve ever heard. Here I was thinking that catechisis was getting better.


Absolutely not. You can be respectful in their place of worship without partaking in the Protestant communion


Show me anything from the ‘Fathers, the Scriptures, [and/or] the traditions of the church’ that parallels with any of this:

"But those who agree with the Pope, and defend his doctrine and [false] services, defile themselves with idolatry and blasphemous opinions, become guilty of the blood of the godly, whom the Pope [and his adherents] persecutes, detract from the glory of God, and hinder the welfare of the Church, because they strengthen errors and crimes to all posterity [in the sight of all the world and to the injury of all descendants].

This being the case, all Christians ought to beware of becoming partakers of the godless doctrine, blasphemies, and unjust cruelty of the Pope. On this account they ought to desert and execrate [curse] the Pope with his adherents as the kingdom of Antichrist.

Nay; such pontiffs and such a government ought to be held accursed." - A Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope

Please, show us where the ancient church promulgated such language and views.



Not a chance you rope me into that discussion here. I’m frankly surprised your post hasn’t been flagged already just for mentioning the A-word.


Yeah, you’re grossly misrepresenting what Luther meant by those private words of pastoral encouragement to a close personal friend.

But you’ve already made up your mind, so I won’t bother trying to persuade you with facts.


Wise choice. God bless you.


Again, I was doing it early, before they explained things. It wasn’t specifically “go to a Protestant Church”, it was an “outside faith activity”


Yes, we don’t want anyone to know; that’s precisely why we put it on the internet for the whole world to read. The local Bible Studies on the Confessions and entire libraries of Lutheran scholarship are just for show. That’s also why no Lutheran ever visits places like Catholic Answers Forum or the Other Extremist Forum Not To Be Named to try to correct misunderstandings of our beliefs, either.

Better luck swallowing a camel than proffering that floppy noodle of an argument. :rofl:

(Unfortunately, I won’t get roped into your game by marching out Rome’s rather unsavory views on various topics. Sorry.)


Under extraordinary conditions, you may be able to receive communion at an Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, or Assyrian church of the east church. Keep in mind, I said “extraordinary”, and, even in this conditions, you may not receive communion from a Protestant community, as there is no apostolic succession, so, no priesthood, and therefore, no eucharist. The reason Catholics have closed communion is because when you receive the communion, you’re saying “I believe what the Church teaches”. Obviously, Protestants don’t believe that, or they’d be Catholic.


Well, I suppose I was the one who asked you what was preventing you from converting to the Catholic Church. However you were the one that claimed, by your conviction, that you are “convinced by Scripture, tradition and history that the Lutheran formulation of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic faith as laid out in the Book of Concord is the closest visible manifestation of what the ancient church should look like today”.

Not only did I concede to this theory, but I commended you on this method! But, when I simply asked you to give me evidence for how the Book of Concord lays this out historically, you merely post a URL link. I mean, does that normally work for you when informing and teaching? I apologize if that comes off as abrasive, but how can you seriously convince yourself or others that doing this is a reasonable way of providing answers when perfectly legitimate questions are posed?!


Well, as much as I’d love to do a walkthrough of the BoC like I do with others, the “Catholic Answers Forum“ is not the place that I teach. I teach in my community, and my parish, the schools that invite me to lecture, and wherever I can have a face-to-face interaction with the people I’m teaching. That way, they can see by my example that I live what I believe — that I am not peddling “filth because [I] won’t care to make it known.”

Proselytizing is against the rules here. You won’t bait me into doing it. No matter how much you denigrate me, my beliefs, my church, or anything else.


I was fairly happy with most aspects of the Lutheran church when I was Lutheran. I am now Catholic. Mainly it was two things: the Eucharist and the priests.

I wanted to take communion more than a few times a year. I became Catholic so I could take communion every Sunday. I knew Catholics often went to church during the week, but I didn’t realize that they had communion then, too. So, once I was a member, I went to church on a Tuesday, just because I could! AND we had communion, too. Bang! Mind-blowing! I now go every Sunday, of course, and I go once or twice a week on week days. Eucharist every time! It’s so wonderful! And it never gets old. This is what I wanted all along and didn’t have in the Lutheran church.

The priests: At one point we had an interim Lutheran pastor whose wife lid him around by the nose, and I had no respect for him. I like that the priests don’t have to go home and be hubbies and kowtow to their wives and kids. The priests give their whole lives to their church and their flock. They are the most hard-working and sincere and holy people. I just love the priests.

The Lutheran church was like a “starter home.” It fit for a while but then I moved on–to what I really wanted all along.


You see, no one is asking you to do a ‘walkthrough’ of anything. I asked a very simple task of where I could read the historical point-of-view you claim that the BOC lays out for what the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic should look like today, and you give me a URL link. Saying you don’t teach on CAF makes me wonder what on earth you are doing here.

Or, you could just show me the ‘history’ laid out in the BOC…:slightly_smiling_face:

Where have I done this?


Those are not ‘offensive-sounding tidbits’. What I quoted regarding the Papacy is downright diabolic. That is not meant to denigrate you, your faith, or your church.


See, you’ve already made a judgement without even asking what Lutherans mean by the word or why they apply it to the papacy. And you did it for shock value.

That’s not discussion in good faith; it’s the imposition of your preconceived notions on someone else’s faith.

Under the circumstances, we cannot have an open discussion about Lutheran beliefs. This is not the place, and you are not in a receptive state of mind. You prefer confrontation.


Actually that is part of it. By taking communion you are remembering that Christ died for your sins and agreeing to walk in the sacrificial way of Christ even if that leads to you being martyred. The non Catholic Church doesn’t have the following the Church part but it does have the crucified with Christ part and although the Catholic Church has the right to deny communion to non Catholics many of us believe that this is grievous to Christ as it promotes division rather than harmony amongst Christians of all stripes.

Incidentaly I’m firmly of the open table opinion when it comes to communion whatever Christian community you come from.


This is most certainly true. One of the best examples is from the Apology, where Melanchthon describes the defense of the doctrine the real presence using the Universal Church, the Fathers, and Scripture.
Out of fear of being suspended if I post the relatively short text, I will instead link to it for interested parties to read.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit