Ecumenical Excesses

proud2bcatholic said:

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.

Click to expand...

Go back maybe 10 pages or so. I'll admit I haven't been keeping up with this thread much, but condemnation of the Pope is the real issue here for me.

Some people here have stated that they know better than the Pope when to grant dispensations.

What this thread amounts to is alot of speculation because it is based on a source (NY Times) that continually slanders the Catholic Church. I think people here should know better than to take what the NY Times says regarding the Catholic faith at face value. Find a reputable source that is not anti-Catholic, and then perhaps we can dicuss it this topic.

DreamTheater said:

Go back maybe 10 pages or so. I'll admit I haven't been keeping up with this thread much, but condemnation of the Pope is the real issue here for me.

Some people here have stated that they know better than the Pope when to grant dispensations.

Click to expand...

I agree. This thread really has run it's course...

lonnienord said:

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

Click to expand...

IMO, the "waiting period" for the catechumans is very important. It is a huge decision to make, to convert to a different faith, and not one that should be made in haste. A time of learning weeds out errors that may have been held previously and also lets us realize exactly what it is that we are doing. It tests our sincerity in our decision.

1348 All gather together. Christians come together in one place for the Eucharistic assembly. At its head is Christ himself, the principal agent of the Eucharist. He is high priest of the New Covenant; it is he himself who presides invisibly over every Eucharistic celebration. It is in representing him that the bishop or priest acting in the person of Christ the head (in persona Christi capitis) presides over the assembly, speaks after the readings, receives the offerings, and says the Eucharistic Prayer. All have their own active parts to play in the celebration, each in his own way: readers, those who bring up the offerings, those who give communion, and the whole people whose "Amen" manifests their participation.


We say "Amen" a lot in the Mass. The Creed. And the other biggie, for those who don't go up to receive, is the great Amen after the "In Him, with Him, though Him ..." Our Amen's throughout are attesting to the truth of the Catholic faith as it is presented throughout the service. Are protestants who participate in this part of the Mass made liars if they don't understand and accept the Catholic view of that which the priest is holding up during this part of the Mass? If they say "Amen" to the Creed but don't view "catholic" or "one" in the same way we do are they lying in their participation in the Mass?



1396 The unity of the Mystical Body: the Eucharist makes the Church. Those who receive the Eucharist are united more closely to Christ. Through it Christ unites them to all the faithful in one body - the Church. Communion renews, strengthens, and deepens this incorporation into the Church, already achieved by Baptism. In Baptism we have been called to form but one body.233 The Eucharist fulfills this call: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread:"234


If you are the body and members of Christ, then it is your sacrament that is placed on the table of the Lord; it is your sacrament that you receive. To that which you are you respond "Amen" ("yes, it is true!") and by responding to it you assent to it. For you hear the words, "the Body of Christ" and respond "Amen." Be then a member of the Body of Christ that your Amen may be true.235


Amen, yes it is true ... and baptism and being a member of the Body of Christ makes our Amen true. I don't think it is being made a liar if they were to take communion given they are baptized and have some belief that they are receiving Jesus in the sacrament. It is that we are trying to uphold the 'visible' Church over the mystical body of Christ (which is not all Catholics, and includes to some extent nonCatholics).

1400 Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, "have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders."239 It is for this reason that, for the Catholic Church, Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible. However these ecclesial communities, "when they commemorate the Lord's death and resurrection in the Holy Supper . . . profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory."240


We exclude protestants because they are not one in aspects of faith and line of apostolic succession and not members of the visible body of Christ, but it isn't that they'd lie by receiving if they were indeed members of the mystical Body of Christ, which is something we don't know for sure even of Catholics. That they are baptized is step one, the entry sacrament for all Christians.

Was wondering if there is an actual reference for the thing on the 'amen' response to 'the Body of Christ' is attesting to being in union with the Pope. I don't think it is in the Catechism. I think it might be more an apologetics angle based on the Eucharist as a sign of unity and the need for conversion -which we all need to convert from where we are towards perfection and perfect unity in Christ.

Shelb5 said:

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.

Click to expand...

proud2bcatholic said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

I have never heard this before. I want to know the truth of the Church's teachings on this matter. If you are not "pulling it out of thin air" you should have no problem simply citing a primary source, an offical Church document on this issue. PLEASE DO. I would appreciate it very much.

Shelb5 said:

Every catechism the Church ever printed.

Click to expand...

Printing is approximately 500 years old in the West. You can only push back this statement that far on the evidence presented by you.

To summarise for me, the issue is that one newspaper has reported that communion was distributed in an indiscriminate fashion at the funeral of Brother Roger.
I have been unable to find any other independent verification that this was the case, that it was deliberate or that it was planned.
This in the light of the death of a man who lived the gospel with his life and who has been villified in this thread, with doubts even placed on his salvation.
Now there are other issues here around non Catholics receiving communion, but there are also issues about the way we seem to be ready to condemn out of hand our pastors when they do things we do not like (or are reported to do things, because I do not believe yet we have heard the whole story about the funeral.)
I pray that the life of Brother Roger will continue to influence many and that his hope- that by living and praying together we could become one- will be seen for what it is, the living of the gospel in his life.

Miss Shelby said:

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

Click to expand...

i would expect most of them would fully convert. When people want to recieve communion and begin to learn about the true Church they usually convert. this would be a way to get people introduced to the true Church

marciadietrich said:

<snip>


We exclude protestants because they are not one in aspects of faith and line of apostolic succession and not members of the visible body of Christ, but it isn't that they'd lie by receiving if they were indeed members of the mystical Body of Christ, which is something we don't know for sure even of Catholics. That they are baptized is step one, the entry sacrament for all Christians.

Was wondering if there is an actual reference for the thing on the 'amen' response to 'the Body of Christ' is attesting to being in union with the Pope. I don't think it is in the Catechism. I think it might be more an apologetics angle based on the Eucharist as a sign of unity and the need for conversion -which we all need to convert from where we are towards perfection and perfect unity in Christ.

Click to expand...

Well expressed, thank you for citing sources I've never heard this angle from an apologist, although I have always attended apologist-heavy churches, but it seems like a sensible explaination of the confusion in this thread.

DreamTheater said:

Go back maybe 10 pages or so. I'll admit I haven't been keeping up with this thread much, but condemnation of the Pope is the real issue here for me.

Some people here have stated that they know better than the Pope when to grant dispensations.

Click to expand...

No one is condemning the Pope... Some people are already confused about who can, and who cannot receive because of what happened.. it is for this reason it was pointed out.. if such a wide dispensation has been granted, then perhaps this should have been announced by the Cardinal to avoid people forming wrong ideas about who can and who cannot receive..

lonnienord said:

i would expect most of them would fully convert. When people want to recieve communion and begin to learn about the true Church they usually convert. this would be a way to get people introduced to the true Church

Click to expand...

I am thinking the same way. Why would one want to be taking instruction on Catholicism, attending a Catholic Church, partaking in communion there, espousing the same beliefs...and not be on the path to joining the Catholic Church?

lonnienord said:

i would expect most of them would fully convert. When people want to recieve communion and begin to learn about the true Church they usually convert. this would be a way to get people introduced to the true Church

Click to expand...

http://www.cathnews.com/news/402/108.html

German Cardinal explains why non-Catholics can't receive Communion

Cardinal Joachim Meisner of Cologne has said that intercommunion will be a sign that Christian unity has been achieved, and there's no place for believing that in the mean time, the practice itself might foster unity between churches.

He stressed that the decision not to allow non-Catholics to receive Communion is not a whim of the Pope or the bishops.

"In the first place, in the realm of the ecumenical dialogue we must really remove all the differences that separate us," the cardinal said. "Only afterward we will be able to give ourselves the gift of the special Eucharistic Communion."

The cardinal expressed the position of the Church, following last week's publication on his archdiocesan website of a letter requestion the "introduction of Communion open to non-Catholics".

The letter had contested the writer's assertion that intercommunion can lead to unity.

Cardinal Meisner said he was gratified by the author's "ecumenical commitment and desire for Christian unity". But He was "surprised" at the writer's "visible lack of knowledge of the Catholic faith".

"The statements of the Synod of the Evangelical Church in the Rhineland on the understanding of Communion have contributed to this disorientation, in which they request that Catholics allow Communion for faithful of the Reformation," the cardinal said.

The cardinal also mentions the confusion created by two priests who distributed Communion to non-Catholics during a Mass at the Ecumenical Ecclesial Days ("Ökumenischer Kirchentag"), held in Berlin last May.

plainswolf said:

No one is condemning the Pope... Some people are already confused about who can, and who cannot receive because of what happened.. it is for this reason it was pointed out.. if such a wide dispensation has been granted, then perhaps this should have been announced by the Cardinal to avoid people forming wrong ideas about who can and who cannot receive..

Click to expand...

Now you're discussing actions surrounding the dispensation, while before you were condmening the dispensation itself.

When I'm at work, I don't tell my boss how to do his job. I'm in no position to do that. Neither do I criticize the Holy Father for failing to follow my interpretation of proper dispensation procedures. I am in no position to do that.

Are all valadly baptized believers Catholics?

The thrust of this thread was "Ecumenical Excesses" Yes they can and do happen... as was abundantly pointed out... Excessive ecumenism destroys the internal unity of the Church for the sake of an undefined external unity.. .. wake up folks.... we need to learn our Faith and pray our Rosary for the Church, the Pope, and the Pastors of the Church... I have recommended a little practice that will greatly aid our beloved Church and our Pastors as well as sanctify our souls... I challenge us all to try it..

marciadietrich said:

1348 All gather together. Christians come together in one place for the Eucharistic assembly. At its head is Christ himself, the principal agent of the Eucharist. He is high priest of the New Covenant; it is he himself who presides invisibly over every Eucharistic celebration. It is in representing him that the bishop or priest acting in the person of Christ the head (in persona Christi capitis) presides over the assembly, speaks after the readings, receives the offerings, and says the Eucharistic Prayer. All have their own active parts to play in the celebration, each in his own way: readers, those who bring up the offerings, those who give communion, and the whole people whose "Amen" manifests their participation.


We say "Amen" a lot in the Mass. The Creed. And the other biggie, for those who don't go up to receive, is the great Amen after the "In Him, with Him, though Him ..." Our Amen's throughout are attesting to the truth of the Catholic faith as it is presented throughout the service. Are protestants who participate in this part of the Mass made liars if they don't understand and accept the Catholic view of that which the priest is holding up during this part of the Mass? If they say "Amen" to the Creed but don't view "catholic" or "one" in the same way we do are they lying in their participation in the Mass?



1396 The unity of the Mystical Body: the Eucharist makes the Church. Those who receive the Eucharist are united more closely to Christ. Through it Christ unites them to all the faithful in one body - the Church. Communion renews, strengthens, and deepens this incorporation into the Church, already achieved by Baptism. In Baptism we have been called to form but one body.233 The Eucharist fulfills this call: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread:"234


If you are the body and members of Christ, then it is your sacrament that is placed on the table of the Lord; it is your sacrament that you receive. To that which you are you respond "Amen" ("yes, it is true!") and by responding to it you assent to it. For you hear the words, "the Body of Christ" and respond "Amen." Be then a member of the Body of Christ that your Amen may be true.235


Amen, yes it is true ... and baptism and being a member of the Body of Christ makes our Amen true. I don't think it is being made a liar if they were to take communion given they are baptized and have some belief that they are receiving Jesus in the sacrament. It is that we are trying to uphold the 'visible' Church over the mystical body of Christ (which is not all Catholics, and includes to some extent nonCatholics).

1400Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, "have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders."239 It is for this reason that, for the Catholic Church, Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible. However these ecclesial communities, "when they commemorate the Lord's death and resurrection in the Holy Supper . . . profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory."240


We exclude protestants because they are not one in aspects of faith and line of apostolic succession and not members of the visible body of Christ, but it isn't that they'd lie by receiving if they were indeed members of the mystical Body of Christ, which is something we don't know for sure even of Catholics. That they are baptized is step one, the entry sacrament for all Christians.

Was wondering if there is an actual reference for the thing on the 'amen' response to 'the Body of Christ' is attesting to being in union with the Pope. I don't think it is in the Catechism. I think it might be more an apologetics angle based on the Eucharist as a sign of unity and the need for conversion -which we all need to convert from where we are towards perfection and perfect unity in Christ.

Click to expand...

Well, I'll try to find some sources if there are any.

Without any sources, let me go this direction.

It is a sin to not assent to the teachings of the Church. If a person then is not in unity with the body (ie believe what the Church teaches), then they are not in a state of grace. Therefore they are not to receive the Blessed Sacrament.

DreamTheater said:

Now you're discussing actions surrounding the dispensation, while before you were condmening the dispensation itself.

When I'm at work, I don't tell my boss how to do his job. I'm in no position to do that. Neither do I criticize the Holy Father for failing to follow my interpretation of proper dispensation procedures. I am in no position to do that.

Click to expand...

Read back DT, I said "if a dispensation was granted then..." If I see my boss breaking one of the company rules or indescriminately applying them to whomever he wants to the exclusion of others is it wrong for me to point this out? NO.. And if I think it's bad for the company, since the boss didn't explain his deviation from policy, is it wrong for me to say so?

plainswolf said:

Read back DT, I said "if a dispensation was granted then..." If I see my boss breaking one of the company rules or indescriminately applying them to whomever he wants to the exclusion of others is it wrong for me to point this out? NO..

Click to expand...

This all goes back to the fact that you believe you are superiour to the Pope when it comes to deciding when dispensations should be given.

Here is another quote from the Catechism, it seems pretty clear that one should only receive the Eucharist if they believe in what the Church teaches.



1355 In the communion, preceded by the Lord's prayer and the breaking of the bread, the faithful receive "the bread of heaven" and "the cup of salvation," the body and blood of Christ who offered himself "for the life of the world": 181