Ecumenical Excesses

Milla said:

Yes, but this:

[/font]

Is what I am asking you to support with sources. It would seem to me to be inaccurate, because as we all know, the RCC allows Orthodox to take communion, and they do not acknowledge the Pope as supreme leader of the Church on earth.

Click to expand...

because they are true Churches, because they have the sacraments, they kept their bishops, they are not illicit, that are the successors to the holy apostles, they are disposed. They are in schism that needs to be healed because these churches were founded by Christ- not Luther or henry, it is apple and oranges we are dealing with here.

Shelb5 said:

because they are true Churches, because they have the sacraments, they kept their bishops, they are not illicit, that are the successors to the holy apostles, they are disposed. They are in schism that needs to be healed because these churches were founded by Christ- not Luther or henry, it is apple and oranges we are dealing with here.

Click to expand...

None of that explains this statement, though.

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…

Click to expand...

lonnienord said:

I know the requirement that one be Catholic and be in a state of grace (yes i do watch mass on EWTN. I believe the pope, cardnal and bishops can allow non catholics to recieve communion. I also think that if we had a class and explained transubstansation and confession and the state of grace we could (if the teaching authority of the Church agreed) allow non catholics to recieve communion. (of course i don't really mean that cause since i think all baptised people are Catholics i would expect that we would only allow baptised people ie Catholics to partake)

Click to expand...

Generally speaking, if they want to receive in the Catholic Church (protestants) must convert through RCIA. If they do not want to do that, they should not receive Communion in the Catholic Church, and not until such time as they are fully initiated should they receive.

I don't know what is all involved with special dispensations, but it shouldn't just be a class that says if they believe then they can receive whenever they want without being Catholic. That does not sound right.

Michelle

Shelb5 said:

They broke away from Jesus’ church.

Click to expand...

actually they did not break away their leaders did. I grew up Seventh-day Adventist. I was told it was the true church. I went ot SDA schools. As a teen ager i had lots of doubts. I never doubted JESUS but i did doubt SDA doctrine. Was it my fault i wasn't Catholic. i was told in church that the catholic church was the mark of the beast. When i was 21 GOD drew me into a High church Episcopal church. then 9 years later HE finally drew me into the Catholic Church. but i always loved JESUS! so why wasn't i given the chance to truely recieve JESUS Body Blood Soul and Divinity. And why do we not allow baptised people to recieve reconcilation and Eucharist? Why wait 6 months during a RCIA program that is often flawed? Have one session teach them the essentials and welcome them into the Church that they already belong to!

Miss Shelby said:

Generally speaking, if they want to receive in the Catholic Church (protestants) must convert through RCIA. If they do not want to do that, they should not receive Communion in the Catholic Church, and not until such time as they are fully initiated should they receive.

I don't know what is all involved with special dispensations, but it shouldn't just be a class that says if they believe then they can receive whenever they want without being Catholic. That does not sound right.

Michelle

Click to expand...

It is mainly when a non-catholic is n danger of death and has accepted all the main tenets of Catholicism on his death bed. He is allowed the sacraments if he wants them.

lonnienord said:

actually they did not break away their leaders did. I grew up Seventh-day Adventist. I was told it was the true church. I went ot SDA schools. As a teen ager i had lots of doubts. I never doubted JESUS but i did doubt SDA doctrine. Was it my fault i wasn't Catholic. i was told in church that the catholic church was the mark of the beast. When i was 21 GOD drew me into a High church Episcopal church. then 9 years later HE finally drew me into the Catholic Church. but i always loved JESUS! so why wasn't i given the chance to truely recieve JESUS Body Blood Soul and Divinity. And why do we not allow baptised people to recieve reconcilation and Eucharist? Why wait 6 months during a RCIA program that is often flawed? Have one session teach them the essentials and welcome them into the Church that they already belong to!

Click to expand...

If one is in the process of conversion they can receive spiritually at the consecration through prayer the grace of Communion. If I am wrong about that, someone correct me please, but I think it's accurate.

Michelle

lonnienord said:

actually they did not break away their leaders did. I grew up Seventh-day Adventist. I was told it was the true church. I went ot SDA schools. As a teen ager i had lots of doubts. I never doubted JESUS but i did doubt SDA doctrine. Was it my fault i wasn't Catholic. i was told in church that the catholic church was the mark of the beast. When i was 21 GOD drew me into a High church Episcopal church. then 9 years later HE finally drew me into the Catholic Church. but i always loved JESUS! so why wasn't i given the chance to truely recieve JESUS Body Blood Soul and Divinity. And why do we not allow baptised people to recieve reconcilation and Eucharist? Why wait 6 months during a RCIA program that is often flawed? Have one session teach them the essentials and welcome them into the Church that they already belong to!

Click to expand...

Okay- so when they realize they are not in the Church Jesse gave to us but a church of dissenter who would not obey Jesus Church and when they decided to stop following the teachings of the dissenters and begin t follw Christ’s fullness of the faith then they can convert and then they can receive but until then they are not in union.

Do you realize that at the point you come to know that Catholicism is true have an obligation convert?

If you know the catholic church is true and you don’t convert- that is mortal sin but let me guess, you never know that either huh?

Take it down a notch, Shelb Let's direct our anger at the issue, not each other.

Shelb5 said:

When you say Amen you are saying that you believe all that the Church purposes for your belief in union with the pope.

Click to expand...

I don't believe that is what the amen itself is saying. You acknowledge a belief in all the Church teaches as a part of becoming Catholic - prior to confirmation and first communion. Then also the Eucharist is a "sign" of oneness of faith and practice, but the amen as a response to "the body of Christ" is a testament to the belief that it is Christ present in the Eucharist. The Body of Christ ... Amen. The Blood of Christ ... Amen. It isn't that you are saying that in the Amen, just you shouldn't be up receiving unless you adhere to the Catholic faith.

If the only reason they have to wait for communion is that they must be fully Catholic to participate, then how can we ever for any reason to give a dispensation? It just wouldn't be possible to do under any circumstances. That it is possible as an exception means that isn't the only reason we make candidates wait until the Easter vigil, and it is more to keep the Eucharist safe and/or exclusive with practicing Catholics.

The problem with too much intercommunion would be it is making the exception into the rule ... which is the theme of a good, though traddy, article on NFP.

BTW, Dr. Phil does rock, I'm sure we can all agree on that.

Marcia

Hi Globalnomad

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.

Click to expand...

I think that there is a serious misunderstanding here going on. Again, I'm being rushed by my daughter to hurry up with the computer... so in advance I request your forgiveness for any misspellings/punctuation mistakes and/or grammar. I'm not use to having to think fast as well as type fast, LOL

I think that we are getting way off track here regarding the Eucharist. I'm not questioning Pope B16 in what he allowed on his watch. But I'm questioning allowing many upon many non-Catholics partake of the Eucharist. I'm not saying that the non-Catholics are not our fellow brothers/sisters in Christ via our baptism. I'm not saying that we should exclude non-Catholics from learning about our faith and sharing with them why we take the Eucharist and what it means to us. Non-Catholics, as Michele aka Shelb5, mentioned earlier... If they truly do understand "Transubstantiation" and accept this DOGMA as the truth and are willing to confess their sins to a priest and receive absolution and become Catholic... more power to them and then after they have completed RCIA... God bless them and please take the Eucharist.

But if the non-Catholics truly do not BELIEVE AND/OR ACCEPT that the Eucharist is truly the BLOOD AND FLESH OF CHRIST, if they do not accept CONFESSION TO A PRIEST AND THUS RECEIVE ABSOLUTION FROM PAST MORTAL SINS, they should not, for their own well-being of their own soul, take the Eucharist. This is not just a communion in remembrance of. The Eucharist is a Sacrament and is very Sacred. As Shelb5 pointed earlier as well is that when a non-Catholic ever should be permitted to partake of the Eucharist... it's needs to be under grave importance... otherwards, they are on their deathbed and they have confessed and received absolution and truly believe what the Eucharist is and truly want the Eucharist and then by all means... give them the Eucharist.

This shouldn't even be a question here. Non-Catholics partaking of the Eucharist has nothing to do with true ecumenism. It has everything to do with misleading a bunch people to trouble with God. This is WRONG PERIOD. Now B16 sharing the Eucharist with one non-Catholic is a lot different than what Cardinal Kasper did.

Also, There is a big difference between a Catholic who has mortal sin on them taking the Eucharist verses a non-Catholic partaking of the Eucharist.

The difference is the Catholic knows better and understands that they are truly endangering their soul to eternal trouble in the bad place. The non-Catholics do not truly understand the Eucharist and thus when they are given the Eucharist and the priest/cardinal knows that he is given the Eucharist to a non-Catholic and continues to do so, it is the priest/cardinal whose soul is in mortal danger of going to the bad place. This isn't even a question here.

Discipline is different then Dogma. Discipline/Traditions/Teachings/Doctrines can and do evolve throughout time according to what has been revealed. Dogma can never change period. The Eucharist is a Dogma.

Please forgive me if I have offended anyone here, that is not my purpose, but we all need to understand that giving non-Catholics the Eucharist is something that should never be taken lightly... this has nothing to do with true ecumenism. Please pray about this, ask the Holy Spirit to show you the Truth here...

God's Peace,

Debbie

Shelb5 said:

If you know the catholic church is true and you don’t convert- that is mortal sin but let me guess, you never know that either huh?

Click to expand...

So you've resorted to an ad hominem attack? I always assumed you were above this level of bickering.

Milla said:

None of that explains this statement, though.

[/i][/font]

Click to expand...

Let me clarify- as a Catholic, you are saying Amen to all the Church teaches under the pope and I am not pulling this out the air I promise you.

The EO are invited but they won’t come- why not? because they do not accept all that we believe, our invitation is a invitation back to unity- they will not receive what they believe is a lie.

But the Anglicans and Lutherans are happy too receive when the disagree with us on a number of things-

Now you tell me what is wrong with this picture?

A Catholic can only receive in EO churches if there is no Catholic Church around for hundreds and thousands of miles.

Why can we? Because they are VALID and licit- the Protestants are not valid let nor licit.

DreamTheater said:

So you've resorted to an ad hominem attack? I always assumed you were above this level of bickering.

Click to expand...

No I haven't-

Globalnomad and Lonnie and others,

I have a question here. What benefit is there in having our fellow Protestant brothers and sisters make a lie? Think about this for a moment... please.

When Catholics go up to the altar and take Jesus into their hands or on their tongues, we are participating in this Sacrament as a community and body of believers joined with other Catholics throughout the world.

Please note though, when we receive the Eucharist, what do we say? We say "AMEN". What does the word Amen mean? It means, "It is so" and/or, it also could mean, "It is TRUE". We are making a SACRED OATH before God and our fellow Catholic community that we assent to the teachings of the Magisterium of the CC and that we are in agreement with the Catholic Magisterium teachings and that we are in full communion with the Catholic Church Magisterium teachings.

It is a Sacred Oath and a Sacrament. Please think about what this means here. It is a Sacred Oath as to what We as Catholics believe in and if any person doesn't believe in this Sacred Oath and Sacrament, why are they partaking in this?

Please think about this... I can't say this enough. We are encouraging our dear and beloved fellow Protestant brothers and sisters to profess a LIE. It is not just about Jesus and me, it is about what all of us Catholics who believe in the Catholic Magisterium teachings are professing to believe in and are in assent and agreement with. How could we endanger the souls of non-Catholics? Why have them profess a lie to God when they say "Amen" and take a Sacred Oath that they do not understand that they are taking, nor do they assent and/or believe and/or accept to be true?

Pax,

Debbie

When one says Amen before receiving communion, they are acknowledging that they are receiving Christ.

However, implied with this, they are acknowledging what the Church teaches. They are acknowledging, the ordination of that priest, and the powers given to him by Christ through the Church.

Pretty much, what it boils down to, is we are acknowledging apostolic succession and the powers given to the Church by Christ.

Actually Fr. Billy gave an excellent homily about this two years ago at my parish. It was also the only time I have ever heard a priest tell Catholics that they should not receive communion unless they are in a state of grace.

Fr. Billy Kosco is about as learned and orthodox of a priest there is.

Shelb is correct about this.

D'Ann said:

Globalnomad and Lonnie and others,

I have a question here. What benefit is there in having our fellow Protestant brothers and sisters make a lie? Think about this for a moment... please.

When Catholics go up to the altar and take Jesus into their hands or on their tongues, we are participating in this Sacrament as a community and body of believers joined with other Catholics throughout the world.

Please note though, when we receive the Eucharist, what do we say? We say "AMEN". What does the word Amen mean? It means, "It is so" and/or, it also could mean, "It is TRUE". We are making a SACRED OATH before God and our fellow Catholic community that we assent to the teachings of the Magisterium of the CC and that we are in agreement with the Catholic Magisterium teachings and that we are in full communion with the Catholic Church Magisterium teachings.

It is a Sacred Oath and a Sacrament. Please think about what this means here. It is a Sacred Oath as to what We as Catholics believe in and if any person doesn't believe in this Sacred Oath and Sacrament, why are they partaking in this?

Please think about this... I can't say this enough. We are encouraging our dear and beloved fellow Protestant brothers and sisters to profess a LIE. It is not just about Jesus and me, it is about what all of us Catholics who believe in the Catholic Magisterium teachings are professing to believe in and are in assent and agreement with. How could we endanger the souls of non-Catholics? Why have them profess a lie to God when they say "Amen" and take a Sacred Oath that they do not understand that they are taking, nor do they assent and/or believe and/or accept to be true?

Pax,

Debbie

Click to expand...

Excellent post Debbie. Let me guess, you've been reading Dr. Hahn.

D'Ann said:

Globalnomad and Lonnie and others,

I have a question here. What benefit is there in having our fellow Protestant brothers and sisters make a lie? Think about this for a moment... please.

When Catholics go up to the altar and take Jesus into their hands or on their tongues, we are participating in this Sacrament as a community and body of believers joined with other Catholics throughout the world.

Please note though, when we receive the Eucharist, what do we say? We say "AMEN". What does the word Amen mean? It means, "It is so" and/or, it also could mean, "It is TRUE". We are making a SACRED OATH before God and our fellow Catholic community that we assent to the teachings of the Magisterium of the CC and that we are in agreement with the Catholic Magisterium teachings and that we are in full communion with the Catholic Church Magisterium teachings.

It is a Sacred Oath and a Sacrament. Please think about what this means here. It is a Sacred Oath as to what We as Catholics believe in and if any person doesn't believe in this Sacred Oath and Sacrament, why are they partaking in this?

Please think about this... I can't say this enough. We are encouraging our dear and beloved fellow Protestant brothers and sisters to profess a LIE. It is not just about Jesus and me, it is about what all of us Catholics who believe in the Catholic Magisterium teachings are professing to believe in and are in assent and agreement with. How could we endanger the souls of non-Catholics? Why have them profess a lie to God when they say "Amen" and take a Sacred Oath that they do not understand that they are taking, nor do they assent and/or believe and/or accept to be true?

Pax,

Debbie

Click to expand...

The issue is not about allowing Protestants to recieve the Eucharist. The issue is about condmening the Pope for his dispensations.

Shelb5 said:

Do you realize that at the point you come to know that Catholicism is true have an obligation convert?

Click to expand...

yes but they are already Catholics because of their baptism so why can't they recieve a 2-3 hour instruction and recieve the sacraments of confession and eucharist which will make their conversion to the Catholic Church more sure and faster. Don't confer confermation until they have recieved indepth instruction

DreamTheater said:

The issue is not about allowing Protestants to recieve the Eucharist.

Click to expand...

I have to admit I was confused by a few of lonnie's comments. He said that the bishops could approve giving a class to allow baptized non Catholics to partake in Communion. It's not clear to me even now if he thinks they should fully convert, or if it would be okay for them to stay Protestant and continue to receive Communion with no intention of converting.

Michelle

DreamTheater said:

The issue is not about allowing Protestants to recieve the Eucharist. The issue is about condmening the Pope for his dispensations.

Click to expand...

Who here is condemning the Pope?

Most of the people, if not all are not even talking about the action taken by the Pope (giving communion to Brother), what most are criticizing is the en masse giving of communion to the protestants at the taize prayer.

From what I understand from the teaching of the Church, is that a Bishop can only do so on an individual basis.

Do you not see the scandal that this can cause, the view that some protestants might take in their ability to receive the precious Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of our Lord.