Ecumenical Excesses

Status
Not open for further replies.

InnerPhyre

Well-Known Member
Nov 13, 2003
14,573
1,470
✟71,967.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Let's not speculate about Brother Roger's affiliation or the state of his soul. He was a great man and if the Pope decided to give him a dispensation to receive the Eucharist, that's just fine.

What we should be concerned about is the distribution of Communion to Protestants en mass at his funeral.
 
Upvote 0

NDIrish

Senior Veteran
Oct 8, 2003
4,649
291
49
Tennessee
Visit site
✟13,979.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
*** ND enters the thread, notices his blood pressure rise significantly, and truns right back around ***

As a tidbit, everyone should ponder this canon from the Council of Trent, Session XIII (we do still believe Trent was a Council, right? And it was infallible (since it was dogmatic), right?):

Canon 11 said:
If anyone says that faith alone is a sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist,[52] let him be anathema. And lest so great a sacrament be received unworthily and hence unto death and condemnation, this holy council ordains and declares that sacramental confession, when a confessor can be had, must necessarily be made beforehand by those whose conscience is burdened with mortal sin, however contrite they may consider themselves. Moreover, if anyone shall presume to teach, preach or obstinately assert, or in public disputation defend the contrary, he shall be <eo ipso> excommunicated.
 
Upvote 0

marciadietrich

Senior Veteran
Dec 5, 2002
4,385
296
60
Visit site
✟13,560.00
Faith
Catholic
NDIrish said:
*** ND enters the thread, notices his blood pressure rise significantly, and truns right back around ***

As a tidbit, everyone should ponder this canon from the Council of Trent, Session XIII (we do still believe Trent was a Council, right? And it was infallible (since it was dogmatic), right?):

It is reaffirming a not by faith alone attitude, probably doctrinal but what does it mean? It also is reaffirming if you know you have mortal sin you should go to confession before participating in the Eucharist. That would be for Catholics. But is it precluding intercommunion?

If you have to hold ALL what Catholics believe then Orthodox would be automatically excluded (and they exclude themselves) ... but we would allow them to partake without any dispensation. Given that from Trent if you believe it means no way to any intercommunion based on faith, then how and why are ANY dispensations allowed?

I haven't had anyone say why Globalnomad's statement on it is how we define 'being properly disposed' isn't like all other doctrines that might be further defined such as the 'no salvation outside the church' has been reevaluated in a positive light in the currect CCC.

Marcia
 
Upvote 0

Rising_Suns

'Christ's desolate heart is in need of comfort'
Jul 14, 2002
10,836
793
44
Saint Louis, MO
✟24,335.00
Faith
Catholic
Shelb5 said:
lonnie, it has been since day one that you have to be properly dipose to take communion- we have no way of knowing that they are!

IP said:
What we should be concerned about is the distribution of Communion to Protestants en mass at his funeral.

We do not have all the facts, and until we do I don't think it does much good to speculate. Why begin pointing fingers?
 
Upvote 0

Rising_Suns

'Christ's desolate heart is in need of comfort'
Jul 14, 2002
10,836
793
44
Saint Louis, MO
✟24,335.00
Faith
Catholic
NDIrish said:
*** ND enters the thread, notices his blood pressure rise significantly, and truns right back around ***

As a tidbit, everyone should ponder this canon from the Council of Trent, Session XIII (we do still believe Trent was a Council, right? And it was infallible (since it was dogmatic), right?):

Right, but not all Protestants believe in faith alone, and some actually believe in the Real Presence.
 
Upvote 0

NDIrish

Senior Veteran
Oct 8, 2003
4,649
291
49
Tennessee
Visit site
✟13,979.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Take another look at the canon. It's not referring to faith being sufficient for salvation, but rather as faith being sufficient for preparation for receiving communion.

Rising_Suns said:
Right, but not all Protestants believe in faith alone, and some actually believe in the Real Presence.
 
Upvote 0

Globalnomad

Senior Veteran
Apr 2, 2005
5,390
660
71
Change countries every three years
✟16,257.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
NDIrish said:
Take another look at the canon. It's not referring to faith being sufficient for salvation, but rather as faith being sufficient for preparation for receiving communion.
Yes, but it does not say anything about what would be required of non-Catholics who receive Communion... because the question was not even posed yet. Dogmas do develop and undergo redefinition - for example, as Marcia is trying to draw our attention to, the one about salvation outside the Catholic Church.
 
Upvote 0

NDIrish

Senior Veteran
Oct 8, 2003
4,649
291
49
Tennessee
Visit site
✟13,979.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Globalnomad said:
Yes, but it does not say anything about what would be required of non-Catholics who receive Communion... because the question was not even posed yet. Dogmas do develop and undergo redefinition - for example, as Marcia is trying to draw our attention to, the one about salvation outside the Catholic Church.

So you think the Church eases the requirements for non-Catholic?

:sigh:
 
Upvote 0

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟40,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
InnerPhyre said:
Let's not speculate about Brother Roger's affiliation or the state of his soul. He was a great man and if the Pope decided to give him a dispensation to receive the Eucharist, that's just fine.

What we should be concerned about is the distribution of Communion to Protestants en mass at his funeral.
That is my feeling, I can live with dispensations i.e., a non catholic who wants to receive at a person who was special to them, funeral etc, but not a whole community of non-Catholics who do not have access to be properly disposed to receive.

I just don’t know what is the end of all this false unity is supposed to be, where does all this false unity end? To be in union with the Church means to actually be in union.

When we say Amen, we are saying Amen to all the Church teaches us under the guidance of the bishop of Rome being lead by the Holy Spirit.

I don’t understand what they are saying “Amen” to. This just denotes a unity that really doesn’t exists, I don’t know why popes are allowing this but I will give them the benefit of the doubt.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Rising_Suns said:
We do not have all the facts, and until we do I don't think it does much good to speculate. Why begin pointing fingers?

Tue, we must give the Pastors the benefit of the doubt... But also, perhaps it would have been prudent for the Cardinal to explain what and why he was doing this beforehand to avoid scandalizing the Faithful... because too many people can form wrong ideas about the Faith by the bad example of a few Pastors.. We the faithful can excercise prudence, but even greater is this obligation for a Prince of the Church, because his actions have scandalized a great many Catholics, some of whom are now confused about who can receive and who can't... The first duty of a priest, bishop, Cardinal and Pope is to protect the integrity of the Faith and the Faith of the flock... if there is any danger of scandal it should either be avoided or explained sufficiently to avoid people forming wrong ideas...

Sometimes there is also a danger in not speaking out. The difficulty is that if a certain hierarch — whether priest, bishop, or pope — is particularly well respected, the faithful under his charge may be tempted to take his every word, action, and even inaction as a positive example. They may be tempted to conform their understanding of right Catholic faith and practice to the man, rather than the man to the Faith.
 
Upvote 0

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟40,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Globalnomad said:
Friends, I propose to refresh this discussion with a new provocative question(actually I think it's a perfectly straight one).

Some of us seem to be assuming that it is a matter of basic faith (dogma, unchangeable) that Communion cannot be given to non-Catholics. Our source is the Pauline warning not to take the body of the Lord unworthily, and the interpretation that the Church has "always" made of this. From there you deduce that even the Pope cannot make exceptions to this.

But when you think about it, the only immutable doctrine is that "it must be taken with the right understanding and disposition". How we define "right understanding and disposition" is actually a Church interpretation of doctrine: it can develop, just as our interpretation of monophysitism and of the internal dynamics of the Trinity (the Filioque clause) has been re-defined to overcome the old East-West theological disputes.

(Regarding the theology of the Real Presence, I don't know the details, but I know that theological discussions with the Evangelicals (the original German Lutheran Protestants) are so advanced, that we are very near the point of allowing intercommunion, to the same extent as with the Orthodox.)

Keeping this in mind, I would say that the Pope is certainly far ahead of us in understanding the theology and doctrine involved, and that he has every right to take the decision that he did. I would say that the extraordinary spirit of Taizé may well be defined as constituting "right understanding and disposition" for those who want to partake of the Eucharist at a unique event in that unique place.
Globe,

Here’s the deal, one does not need to be a theologian or a pope to know that one can not approach the alter conscious of mortal sin and if one is conscious of mortal sin they can not commune until they have made a prior sacramental confession.

We know children are not allowed to receive unless they have been educated and they have made their first confession - sacramental confession that is and we know we can not receive communion when we are in RCIA because we have to be educated and instructed in the faith and we have to have made a prior sacramental confession before hand.

Why are all these rules chucked for non Catholics is the question at hand.

The teaching is this, if one takes communion conscious of mortal sin on their soul and they have not received prior sacramental confession then they eat and drink judgement onto themselves, why would this be different for a non catholic?

We know as a matter of faith that God forgives and erases the effects of sin lock, stock, and barrel when we have perfect contrition but we also know that none of us can ever know if we do unless we receive revelation from on high if we are truly perfectly contrite so that is why we confess to perfect what is imperfect and then with this grace we approach the holy of holies, our Lord in the Eucharist but for some reason this is not required of protestants?

I don’t get it- we don’t want to condemn them so why are we giving them a potential that could condemn them?

Frankly- it really wouldn’t be their fault for receiving communion unworthy, it would be the fault of what ever pope/bishop/ priest who said it was okay for them, he will get the blame for this, not the non Catholics, so I don’t get any of this, I really don’t.

Are we just going to affirm the errors of Protestantism now and allow them to be in union with out ever pledging obedience to Rome?

Do you really think that's Catholic?
 
Upvote 0

Paul S

Salve, regina, mater misericordiæ
Sep 12, 2004
7,872
281
46
Louisville, KY
✟17,194.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Globalnomad said:
Yes, but it does not say anything about what would be required of non-Catholics who receive Communion... because the question was not even posed yet. Dogmas do develop and undergo redefinition - for example, as Marcia is trying to draw our attention to, the one about salvation outside the Catholic Church.

Salvation outside the Church has not changed. Only those non-Catholics in invincible ignorance may be saved. What has changed is that we no longer presume all Protestants are guilty of the mortal sin of heresy, and thus might remain part of the Church.
 
Upvote 0

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟40,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
lonnienord said:
i am and i hope our leaders are. I suggest that at least once a month every Catholic Church have a training session where everyone is told the requirements for recieving communion. I think those requirements should be an understanding and belief in transubstantion, and sacramental confession if the person is not in the state of grace.
Oh my goodness…

Lonnie- the requirement is YOU HAVE TO BE CATHOLIC!

When you say Amen Lonnie it is not just that you are saying Amen to Jesus is there, but to ALL that holy mother Church purposes for our belief IN UNION with the bishop of Rome.

These non-catholics in no way can say Amen to that- they do not pledge obedience t the pope! They refuse to!

I’m in coronary shock again people…
 
Upvote 0

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟40,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Globalnomad said:
Markh, it would have been totally against what Brother Roger taught and represented, to convert to Catholicism secretly. I know about the speculations, but I am convinced they are an urban legend by people who don't understand his spirit and the high regard in which the Catholic Church holds him.

The Church has already changed her teachings on this issue. Non-Catholics - especially the Orthodox, but any other baptised person as well - are officially allowed to receive Communion under certain restrictive circumstances. We may go on debating whether those circumstances were present at Brother Roger's funeral, but I see no justification for making a statement as categorical and exclusivist as the one you made here.
the Church changed her teachings??? Cite????
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟40,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Globalnomad said:
Yes, but it does not say anything about what would be required of non-Catholics who receive Communion... because the question was not even posed yet. Dogmas do develop and undergo redefinition - for example, as Marcia is trying to draw our attention to, the one about salvation outside the Catholic Church.
yes develope but the DO NOT CHANGE and you ar implying that are going from not be able to, to being able to when the CCC only says that in danger of DEATH thay can, not a love fest for Protestants!


Wanna cite for me the teaching that you say changed? Show me the teaching and then show me where, when and how it changed?
 
Upvote 0

Rising_Suns

'Christ's desolate heart is in need of comfort'
Jul 14, 2002
10,836
793
44
Saint Louis, MO
✟24,335.00
Faith
Catholic
Shelb5 said:
Oh my goodness…

Lonnie- the requirement is YOU HAVE TO BE CATHOLIC!

When you say Amen Lonnie it is not just that you are saying Amen to Jesus is there, but to ALL that holy mother Church purposes for our belief IN UNION with the bishop of Rome.

This is untrue, Michelle. Orthodox are not Catholic nor are they in communion with Rome, yet they are allowed communion in our Church's.
 
Upvote 0

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟40,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Paul S said:
Salvation outside the Church has not changed. Only those non-Catholics in invincible ignorance may be saved. What has changed is that we no longer presume all Protestants are guilty of the mortal sin of heresy, and thus might remain part of the Church.
That is exactly right Paul, after the 16 century Luther changed the face of Christendom forever and the Church is dealing with the repercussions 500 years later- she did not change, Luther changed the face of all of Christendom and the Church is now having to include there poor victims of Luther’s dissidence who by no fault of their own may never know the truth of Christ’s Church.
 
Upvote 0

Benedicta00

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2003
28,512
838
Visit site
✟40,563.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Rising_Suns said:
This is untrue, Michelle. Orthodox are not Catholic nor are they in communion with Rome, yet they are allowed communion in our Church's.
They are true churches though- they have legitimate diocese, the Anglicans, Lutherans and who ever else, DO NOT.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.