Communion for non-Catholics in the Catholic church

[jmcrae]

But I think we do have to remember the Church does says we all are Catholic if baptized according to the rites of the CC.

I also have to say I know I personally find it more welcoming when Catholics are more tolerant as Paul taught us to be in Ephesians 4:2. But that’s me.

It’s one thing if the person is just quietly sitting in the pew - I imagine 90% of those sitting in the pews are in a state of formal heresy - but we are speaking here of someone who is an RCIA Catechist. A higher standard is required, in this case.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

But I think we do have to remember the Church does says we all are Catholic if baptized according to the rites of the CC.

I also have to say I know I personally find it more welcoming when Catholics are more tolerant as Paul taught us to be in Ephesians 4:2. But that’s me.

Of course, you’ve come rather ‘late’ to the discussion. . .now, perhaps if St. Paul had tried, oh, say months ago, to be ‘gentle’, had had the same responses over and over and over, refusing to ‘listen’, I think St. Paul would have responded as he did in some of his later epistles to those who 'refused to listen. . ." It’s always a mistake to think that if you (personally) only saw response ‘X’ from a poster that the poster had not previously tried every response from A to Z and then some. . . Do you likewise think that we only have to accept ‘some’ Church teachings and can still call ourselves Catholic and insist that it’s perfectly acceptable Catholic teaching to only accept ‘some’ teachings?

 

[Carlan]

If you want to be a vegan and eat meat hey that is your choice:thumb sup:

So you are telling every one out there that if they wish to be a Catholic and not accept the teaching authority of the Church, the Magisterium, the Papacy, all truth, only that which they wish to believe as being quite acceptable? Oh Tweety, you really are in denial.Carlan

 

[tweetymom]

If you want to be a Bible-only Christian, there are places you can go to church where everyone agrees with that idea.

But to call yourself a Catholic while practicing Bible-only Christianity is very strange. Why not just call yourself what you are, and get slotted into the place where you fit, instead of trying to pretend that you are a Catholic, and not fitting in in the Catholic Church?

I fit in very well were I am planted, thank you, am not pretending anything i tell the truth I do not agree with all the CC teaches. And perhaps you need to get the beam out of your own eye.

 

[tweetymom]

So you are telling every one out there that if they wish to be a Catholic and not accept the teaching authority of the Church, the Magisterium, the Papacy, all truth, only that which they wish to believe as being quite acceptable? Oh Tweety, you really are in denial.Carlan

I am not in denial about anything, perhaps you too need to get the beam out of your own eye

 

[tweetymom]

I do not have to tell you that I do not teach any doctrine and if I did I would teach what the Church says, I think I have stated that at least a hundred times and a lot to you, so do not be disturbed.

 

[CMatt25]

Of course, you’ve come rather ‘late’ to the discussion. . .now, perhaps if St. Paul had tried, oh, say months ago, to be ‘gentle’, had had the same responses over and over and over, refusing to ‘listen’, I think St. Paul would have responded as he did in some of his later epistles to those who 'refused to listen. . ." It’s always a mistake to think that if you (personally) only saw response ‘X’ from a poster that the poster had not previously tried every response from A to Z and then some. . . Do you likewise think that we only have to accept ‘some’ Church teachings and can still call ourselves Catholic and insist that it’s perfectly acceptable Catholic teaching to only accept ‘some’ teachings?

I just know who the Church calls Catholic.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I fit in very well were I am planted, thank you, am not pretending anything i tell the truth I do not agree with all the CC teaches. And perhaps you need to get the beam out of your own eye.

What if it’s your beam, Tweety, and her **speck–not the other way around?

**Why are you insisting on calling yourself Catholic and worshipping in a Catholic Church while denying vital, significant, and multiple Catholic teachings?

Aren’t you denying Christ if you do so? Because if the Catholic Church isn’t teaching Truth–and you say it isn’t when you say you don’t agree with its teachings–then why are you there?

Does any other Christian out there believe that he or she can worship in a particular church while denying its core beliefs?

Do Baptists think they’re perfectly fine as Baptists if they deny the Baptist teachings on baptism and sacraments?

Do Methodists think they’re perfectly fine as Methodists if they deny the Methodist teachings regarding the nature of Christ?

Do Episcopalians think they’re perfectly fine as Episcopalians if they deny that God is Three Divine Persons in One God?

I’m just wondering. I can’t imagine that in every single one of these faiths. . .in every faith… .that there are some ‘core beliefs’ that one simply cannot deny and still remain considered a ‘member’ of that faith.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I just know who the Church calls Catholic.

The Church also can call them 'disobedient Catholics", “Lapsed Catholics”, “non practicing Catholics”. . . I’m not going that far out of respect but I can most assuredly point out that if a person is saying they are Catholic but denying core elements of the faith that they certainly cannot claim to be a ‘good’ Catholic or an 'obedient Catholic." That’s not my judgment, it’s their own. Would you agree with that?

 

[CMatt25]

It’s one thing if the person is just quietly sitting in the pew - I imagine 90% of those sitting in the pews are in a state of formal heresy - but we are speaking here of someone who is an RCIA Catechist. A higher standard is required, in this case.

I’m not there but I was just thinking if tweetymom is an RCIA catechist, her priest must be pleased with her performance.

 

[tweetymom]

What if it’s your beam, Tweety, and her **speck–not the other way around?

**Why are you insisting on calling yourself Catholic and worshipping in a Catholic Church while denying vital, significant, and multiple Catholic teachings?

Aren’t you denying Christ if you do so? Because if the Catholic Church isn’t teaching Truth–and you say it isn’t when you say you don’t agree with its teachings–then why are you there?

Does any other Christian out there believe that he or she can worship in a particular church while denying its core beliefs?

Do Baptists think they’re perfectly fine as Baptists if they deny the Baptist teachings on baptism and sacraments?

Do Methodists think they’re perfectly fine as Methodists if they deny the Methodist teachings regarding the nature of Christ?

Do Episcopalians think they’re perfectly fine as Episcopalians if they deny that God is Three Divine Persons in One God?

I’m just wondering. I can’t imagine that in every single one of these faiths. . .in every faith… .that there are some ‘core beliefs’ that one simply cannot deny and still remain considered a ‘member’ of that faith.

Listen for the last time I do not disagree with all the CC teaches. I call myself Catholic and I go to CC because I choose to. Now sorry if you have a problem with that. If you agree with all the CC teaches good for you and God Bless.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I’m not there but I was just thinking if tweetymom is an RCIA catechist, her priest must be pleased with her performance.

And the point is?

I can think of several possible scenarios.

A. Tweetymom’s performance as a RCIA catechist ‘appears’ perfectly fine.

1. It truly is 'fine.
2. It is mostly fine, and what isn’t kosher the priest doesn’t know about.
3. It is sometimes fine, and what isn’t kosher the priest doesn’t know about.
4. It is sometimes fine, what isn’t kosher the priest knows about but considers as ‘acceptable’ because “it’s hard to get people to do this job and she hasn’t outright given scandal to the bishop yet.”

B. Tweetymom’s performance as an RCIA catechist is unknown to the priest beyond the fact that she shows up, smiles, says ‘nice things’, and nobody 'complains.

1. Sometimes people complain but they complain about everybody and he can’t be bothered to check out every complaint!

C. Tweetymom’s performance as an RCIA catechist has been an issue.

1. The priest knows it but he is a gentle, ‘inclusive’ soul who feels that in one year she isn’t going to do enough ‘damage’ to a soul to worry about.
2. The priest knows it but since he secretly shares a lot of her beliefs he’ll back her every step of the way.
3. The priest knows it, OPENLY shares a lot of her beliefs and figures that she’s the perfect one to help get those beliefs to the congregation because she’s a sweet old ‘cradle Catholic’.

I could come up with more, and please mind you, these **are total speculation. They are not meant to indicate my personal belief, they are not a ‘charge’ at Tweetymom. They are totally ‘fictitious’, they are simply a literary type of ‘device’, they are in no way meant to indicate that I personally ‘charge’ Tweetymom with any or all of them.

but the point is, that simply having a priest ‘permit’ a person to teach RCIA is no guarantee of either the person’s probity, or the priest’s either.
**

 

[CMatt25]

The Church also can call them 'disobedient Catholics", “Lapsed Catholics”, “non practicing Catholics”. . . I’m not going that far out of respect but I can most assuredly point out that if a person is saying they are Catholic but denying core elements of the faith that they certainly cannot claim to be a ‘good’ Catholic or an 'obedient Catholic." That’s not my judgment, it’s their own. Would you agree with that?

I’m sorry. But I’m not quite understanding this whole discourse. You aren’t using adjectives out of respect but you are trying to tell people she is not Catholic? I may be missing the respect part in this whole discussion but that’s just me I guess.

 

[jmcrae]

I’m sorry. But I’m not quite understanding this whole discourse. You aren’t using adjectives out of respect but you are trying to tell people she is not Catholic? I may be missing the respect part in this whole discussion but that’s just me I guess.

Click on her name and read through her posts; let her own words speak for her.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Wow, as I see how late it’s getting I also realize how far we have wandered from the thread topic–mea culpa.

I apologize for going ‘far afield’, interesting as the side discussion was. . .and hope that whatever I said was received in charity, as indeed, I meant it in charity, and for any inadvertent ‘lapse’ that may have occurred I am sincerely sorry.

Now if we wish to go back’ on track’, I’m perfectly willing to discuss the fact that communion in the Catholic Church means that one is ‘in union’ with all the teachings of the Catholic Church, and that our prayerful and loving request to non-Catholics to refrain from the visible ‘sign’ of the Eucharist when they are NOT ’ in union’ with us in our teachings is meant as a gesture of love and respect.

 

[CMatt25]

And the point is?

I can think of several possible scenarios.

A. Tweetymom’s performance as a RCIA catechist ‘appears’ perfectly fine.

1. It truly is 'fine.
2. It is mostly fine, and what isn’t kosher the priest doesn’t know about.
3. It is sometimes fine, and what isn’t kosher the priest doesn’t know about.
4. It is sometimes fine, what isn’t kosher the priest knows about but considers as ‘acceptable’ because “it’s hard to get people to do this job and she hasn’t outright given scandal to the bishop yet.”

B. Tweetymom’s performance as an RCIA catechist is unknown to the priest beyond the fact that she shows up, smiles, says ‘nice things’, and nobody 'complains.

1. Sometimes people complain but they complain about everybody and he can’t be bothered to check out every complaint!

C. Tweetymom’s performance as an RCIA catechist has been an issue.

1. The priest knows it but he is a gentle, ‘inclusive’ soul who feels that in one year she isn’t going to do enough ‘damage’ to a soul to worry about.
2. The priest knows it but since he secretly shares a lot of her beliefs he’ll back her every step of the way.
3. The priest knows it, OPENLY shares a lot of her beliefs and figures that she’s the perfect one to help get those beliefs to the congregation because she’s a sweet old ‘cradle Catholic’.

I could come up with more, and please mind you, these **are total speculation. They are not meant to indicate my personal belief, they are not a ‘charge’ at Tweetymom. They are totally ‘fictitious’, they are simply a literary type of ‘device’, they are in no way meant to indicate that I personally ‘charge’ Tweetymom with any or all of them.

but the point is, that simply having a priest ‘permit’ a person to teach RCIA is no guarantee of either the person’s probity, or the priest’s either.**

Ok but my point was merely since we aren’t there, I just prefer choosing the first point A1 But that’s just me. So back to the thread…

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I’m sorry. But I’m not quite understanding this whole discourse. You aren’t using adjectives out of respect but you are trying to tell people she is not Catholic? I may be missing the respect part in this whole discussion but that’s just me I guess.

Quickly now so as not to stray off topic, I’d like to be clear in saying that I am not, and have never been, trying to tell anybody that she is NOT Catholic. That’s not what I meant in my posts at all.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Ok but my point was merely since we aren’t there, I just prefer choosing the first point A1 But that’s just me.

I can understand that, and if that were the only point I’d agree. But it’s not. . .and one must consider that. Again, trying to stay on topic. And the topic is that of non-Catholics feeling offended at being ‘excluded’ from communion.

Of course, Catholics themselves should ‘exclude themselves’ from communion if they are not in a state of grace, and should perform an examination of conscience regularly, receive the sacrament of reconciliation whenever they are in mortal sin (and yearly as is our Easter Duty even if we are not in mortal sin), and should ‘understand’ the nature of communion as well.

 

[tweetymom]

1. My priest was the one who asked me to teach RCIA.
2. I do not, repeat do not teach anything contrary to CC teaching
3. I teach about prayer
4. I teach on personal ministries.
5. I would never tell anyone not to believe xyz of the CC, Have never been ask by the way

 

[tweetymom]

:clear in saying that I am not, and have never been, trying to tell anybody that she is NOT Catholic. That’s not what I meant in my posts at all.

Oh really news to me.