Valid baptism, but no Valid Eucharist?


#1

If anyone can administer a valid baptism (name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit), Can anyone administer a valid transubstantiation of the elements to the body and blood of Christ?

If so, why?

If not, why?


#2

[quote="katholikos12, post:1, topic:309907"]
If anyone can administer a valid baptism (name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit), Can anyone administer a valid transubstantiation of the elements to the body and blood of Christ?

If so, why?

If not, why?

[/quote]

No. Only those with valid holy orders can confect the Eucharist, Confirm, hear Confession, Anoint the Sick, and Ordain.


#3

[quote="1ke, post:2, topic:309907"]
No. Only those with valid holy orders can confect the Eucharist, Confirm, hear Confession, Anoint the Sick, and Ordain.

[/quote]

Why.

Why the differentiation between those you listed and baptism for holy orders?


#4

[quote="katholikos12, post:3, topic:309907"]
Why.

Why the differentiation between those you listed and baptism for holy orders?

[/quote]

[BIBLEDRB]1 Corinthians 12:12-30[/BIBLEDRB]

People have different roles in the Church as our different body parts have different roles in our body. God is a God of order, there are certain roles fulfilled only be certain people, just as your hand cannot taste and your tongue cannot hold, your eyes cannot walk and your feet cannot see, but all belong to the one body and is an important part of it.


#5

All seven sacraments have their basis in Jewish rituals of the Old Testament.

Baptism has its basis in the Jewish ritual purification bath - what they called the mikvah. One did not need a levitical priest to do that. One did not need a levitical priest to create a covenant bond of marriage either. A covenant between husband and wife were created when the two entered into the covenant, and the same is true now.

Baptism and marriage therefor, never needed a third party in the Old Testament, nor does it need one now. The other sacraments required a levitical priest or in some cases a prophet, and so they require a priest now.

Even so, we go to an ordained member of the clergy for baptism and marriage anyway, just to be sure.

-Tim-


#6

[quote="katholikos12, post:3, topic:309907"]
Why.

Why the differentiation between those you listed and baptism for holy orders?

[/quote]

Because baptism is necessary for salvation.

So, although the priest is the ordinary minister, anyone may baptize in an emergency if a priest is not available because of its necessity for salvation.

From the Catechism:

V. Who can Baptize?

1256 The ordinary ministers of Baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon. In case of necessity, any person, even someone not baptized, can baptize, if he has the required intention. the intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes, and to apply the Trinitarian baptismal formula. the Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation.


#7

[quote="TimothyH, post:5, topic:309907"]
All seven sacraments have their basis in Jewish rituals of the Old Testament.

Baptism has its basis in the Jewish ritual purification bath - what they called the mikvah.

[/quote]

Baptism is the New Covenant sign, the entry into the Covenant, replacing Circumcision not ritual baths.


#8

My understanding is that a Baptised person, in an extreme situation, (fear of death?) may Baptise another. Otherwise they should go to the Church and have a Priest Baptise, and get a certificate, so they may prepare to receive the other Sacraments.

The Priest during Mass is standing in for Jesus. In the person of Christ. Only a Priest can do that. God has a structure to his Church & His Kingdom which we respect!


#9

Ok if anyone can baptize since it is necessary for salvation, one could run that same line of logic to confession since a state of mortal sin requires confession and therefore confessing your sins to a layman should be allowed in order to save.

I know this is not true via the apostolic succession of the power to forgive sins given by Christ (sins forgiven, sins retained...)

so does it simply stem from the previous poster who mentioned the traditions from the Levitical priesthood? If so why was that kept; there was a change in the law and therefore a change in the priesthood, why then could the forgiveness not extend to all since Christ calls us all to be priests in his new covenant?


#10

I mean the power to forgive sins to extend to all*


#11

You really need to sit down and discuss this one on one with your Priest.

The following is my personal opinion and belief. If I'm incorrect I hope someone will correct my error.

I believe it's from the apostolic succession. The new priesthood was founded by Christ and passed down by the Church. One must be ordained to stand in for Christ in confession and at the consecration of the Eucharist.

I can tell a friend about the sins I'm committed. The best they can do is say that if I'm sorry they know God has forgiven me. One of the blessings of going to confession is that I can verbally hear from God that I'm forgiven through the words of the Priest.

I am an EMHC for the sick and home bound. I haven't had the honor of bringing Our Lord to anyone yet. I just received the pyx I had ordered and when in training I asked if I could keep two of the unconsecrated hosts. I wanted to practice removing one without my fingernails chipping off the edges. There is no way I could take one, say the Eucharistic prayer, elevate it and have it become the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. One, because I'm female and Christ is male and two, I'm not a priest. I'm not ordained and never will be.

Again, please speak to your Priest.


#12

Surely God commands us to forgive one another, meaning we can forgive other people who committed offences against us. But we cannot forgive others for sins they did not commit against us but against someone else. The Church, being the body of Christ, can forgive you in behalf of the others who are also members of the body of Christ (first the baptized, and then all as God is in all of us). Also the Sacrament isn't just about forgiveness of sins, but also reuniting us with the Church and also the counseling which is what we need for true repentance.


#13

[quote="katholikos12, post:1, topic:309907"]
If anyone can administer a valid baptism (name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit), Can anyone administer a valid transubstantiation of the elements to the body and blood of Christ?

If so, why?

If not, why?

[/quote]

No. One needs only to be human for one sacrament. Once needs to be baptized and ordained to perform the other.


#14

Ok if anyone can baptize since it is necessary for salvation, one could run that same line of logic to confession since a state of mortal sin requires confession and therefore confessing your sins to a layman should be allowed in order to save.

I know this is not true via the apostolic succession of the power to forgive sins given by Christ (sins forgiven, sins retained...)

so does it simply stem from the previous poster who mentioned the traditions from the Levitical priesthood? If so why was that kept; there was a change in the law and therefore a change in the priesthood, why then could the forgiveness not extend to all since Christ calls us all to be priests in his new covenant?

In an extreme situation perfect contrition whose motivation is perfect love of God effects extra-sacramental justification when it is associated with the desire for the Sacrament of Confession. The Council of Trent (Session 14, Chapter 4) teaches as follows:
*
"The Synod teaches moreover, that, although it sometimes happen that this contrition is perfect through charity, and reconciles man with God before this sacrament be actually received, the said reconciliation, nevertheless, is not to be ascribed to that contrition, independently of the desire of the sacrament which is included therein."*


#15

[quote="katholikos12, post:9, topic:309907"]
Ok if anyone can baptize since it is necessary for salvation, one could run that same line of logic to confession since a state of mortal sin requires confession and therefore confessing your sins to a layman should be allowed in order to save.

[/quote]

No, one cannot "run the same logic".

[quote="katholikos12, post:9, topic:309907"]
so does it simply stem from the previous poster who mentioned the traditions from the Levitical priesthood?

[/quote]

No, while well meaning, that post was entirely off base. The Levitical priesthood is unrelated to the sacraments or to the Catholic priesthood.


#16

[quote="1ke, post:15, topic:309907"]
No, one cannot "run the same logic".

[/quote]

Well yes you can. at least what i mean is that this is the way I am thinking as a fundamentalist who is considering joining the CC. It my head that's the way i think. I want to join the CC but i have so many questions and often my logic is flawed and i recognize that. so when i say "one can run the same line of logic" I really mean "I run the same line of logic". I know very little of the CC outside of major theological and scriptural basis for major doctrine ie transubstantiation, marian doctrines, Papal infalability etc.


#17

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