Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Nonsense. A mainstream Christian that loves the Lord is not unworthy to receive communion. Open communion churches like mine also have the same scripture. Haven’t seen one keel over yet.
And under the heading "and many many more"
The set up for that being:
They are saying the elements themselves are not supernatural. Despite what a counsel came up with hundreds of years after last supper.
It’s clear you care deeply about Christian unity, but the way you’ve framed this - “fullness of faith,” “defective,” “darkness,” “sad” - feels less like an invitation to honest dialogue and more like an attempt to corner the other person emotionally. Catholics don’t refuse shared worship because they think you’re in “darkness”; they refrain from intercommunion because they believe the Eucharist is the sign of already‑existing doctrinal unity, not a tool to create it. You clearly have warm, genuine relationships with your local Catholic parish, which is wonderful, but that makes your tone here even more puzzling. Are you trying to understand their reasoning, or are you trying to pick a fight?
In remembrance of our savior as the scriptures clearly tell us. You clearly do not understand the importance of communion for other mainstream churches. It seems that you are one of the elitists that I was talking about in my other post.
It’s a thoughtful list, and it really does show how wide and varied the Christian tradition has become over the centuries. Still, presenting these differences as a kind of “a cornucopia of options” can make it harder for people to feel heard or respected. Every one of those beliefs has a long story behind it, shaped by sincere attempts to follow Christ faithfully, even when the conclusions differ. If the hope is genuine conversation and deeper understanding, approaching these topics with curiosity rather than dismissal will open far more doors. I’m always glad to talk through any of them in a constructive way if that’s what you’re aiming for.
If you mean that their beliefs about holy communion are explained as "symbolic" then you're right, it is juice and bread present only as symbols of the body and blood of Christ - not a real presence but rather a real absence.
If you want to see the tone that I usually receive from your camp just look at your fellow Catholics @concretecamper and @jas3 responses to me in this thread. Elitism, which includes the words that I cited in my post and you repeated here, is what keeps the dialogue contentious.
Where 2 or 3 are gathered in my name I am there in their midst……..(paraphrase of Matt. 18:20).
I was a mainline open-communion Protestant for about 30 years, so I like to think I have some idea of the importance or lack thereof placed on communion in those communities. When you've never experienced anything else, it might feel like you're taking it seriously, but there's a wide gulf between memorialism and the type of communion described in 1 Corinthians.
I am not a Roman Catholic.
Rather, you coming out swinging in #17 at churches that practice "closed" (i.e. normal) communion invites an atmosphere of contention.
Let's take into consideration that he was compared to Satan in this thread. That right there is concrete evidence of his assertion.
I was a Catholic for the first 25 years or so of my life. I don’t miss the Catholic Church.
So you are not but your tone is quite similar.
Not swinging just exposing. The thread is about disputed doctrines and that one is one of mine. You are not going to get added brownie points for your theology when you get to the same heaven as the rest of us.
Not exactly. The presence of Christ is acknowledged; He is considered very much present. But not in a literal physical flesh and blood presence as in one is drinking the physical blood of Christ and eating the physical flesh of Christ. In other words a holy spiritual presence rather than a physical presence.
By presence does that mean believing that the wine has turned into the literal physical blood of Christ? That they are drinking the actual human corpuscles of Jesus?
