Catholics and Presbyterians are theologically closer to one another than either are to Orthodox. It's just outward ritual expression and aesthetics Catholics and Orthodox share more commonality in. It's superficial. Catholics and Presbyterians operate under the same Augustinian framework. Orthodox are more similar to Pelagians.
>>18259069Presbyterians frequently practice toddler communion. So like Orthodox, they are Christians.
>>18259069I'm Presbyterian
>Catholics and Presbyterians are theologically closer to one another than either are to Orthodox. OP is retarded and does not understand sacramentology or ecclesiology.He also thinks having a liturgical tradition is superficial.
Calvinists don't operate under an Augustinian framework.They reject the sacraments Augustine identifies, like ordination and marriage.Yes, while both Catholics and Orthodox uphold both ordination and marriage as sacraments, and Augustine agrees, Calvinists reject these as sacraments.The sacraments are of centrally critical importance to the religious life of faith and truly orthodox theology. Augustine understood this.Calvinists do not. Calvinists deny the body of Christ being really present in the Eucharist, as would be necessary for him to be fully present in any real sense as a man with both body and soul that are united to one another intractably and without the confusion of division or separation. And not only body and soul of man together being really present, but his divine essence too.His glorified body available to the body of the communicant just as his soul is available to their soul, like corresponding to like, both uplifted and infused with the divine graces.The fullness of the Godhead dwelling bodily, that those of faith might discern not merely the symbol of his body, but the flesh and blood itself really present along with the human soul and godly divinity.
Do Calvinists profess that the body of Christ is made present to the body of the communicant?Or that his soul is made present to the soul of the communicant.One manly soul, one manly body, both divine and made available with respects to the manly soul and body of the communicant?Which uplifts man unto divinity with him, in him, and through him?No, last I checked they claim that his body is made available to the *soul* of the communicant. Which is a categorical error.This is a thinly disguised gnostic conceit, one which pretends the body of Christ is mere appearance and was never fully incarnated. Instead, being of a purely spiritual substance like the soul is.
>inb4 b-but Jesus is in heaven and seated at the right hand of the Father so it's impossible for his body to be present on earth at the same timeIn the Old Testament, when the presence of God was in the Tabernacle and with his people, was he suddenly absent from heaven?Of course not. Jesus' physicality which was gotten by the Virgin Mary is not a barrier to his real simultaneous presence in the Eucharist all around the world because it is not accomplished through ordinary means, but by the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit and a substantive miracle.Since as a man, he is also fully divine. Having all the natural qualities of man AND the divine power to transcend these inherent limitations of corporeal form which impose themselves on our senses and faculties of reason.As much as Jesus is truly God and truly man, and as a man has a body and soul, this fullness of divinity which is embodied in him is fully present in the real sense, in the Eucharist, in no wise lacking in flesh and blood or his human soul. If you were to dispute this, you would have to argue that the boy named Jesus was not truly God.
