Did Jesus Say He Would Not Turn Away Anyone?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GUYMAN
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GUYMAN

Guest
I believe he did (I forget exactly where in Scripture). If that’s the case how do we reconcile that with denying someone the eucharist? There is no way to know what’s in another person’s heart. And when it comes to things that might be known (like being divorced) which one of us can say we go to the altar free of sin?
 
We are not supposed to turn anyone away who seeks to become Christian or who seeks to return to Christ through repentance and salvation.

Scripture laid out very clear guidelines for the Eucharist, including that people can be damned if they eat or drink unworthily!

While the Eucharist heals us of veinal sins, we are absolutely to be without grave sin when we approach the altar.
 
Last edited:
It would be easier if you could provide the reference
 
I hope you aren’t implying that ‘two wrongs make a right’, i.e., 'somebody is going to receive while not in a state of grace, but we don’t know it because they aren’t making it public, therefore people who are making it public that they aren’t in a state of grace should be able to receive, because they ‘could’ if only people weren’t publicly aware". . .
 
Also, did Jesus say that He would not turn away anyone, but insist that those who turn away from HIM are going to be forced to come to Him?

Did Jesus ever say, “I don’t condemn you, I don’t turn you away, now go and keep on doing wrong because you’re covered?”

I’m not trying to be a PITA here, but one has to be careful to take things in context. those who come to Him come with the intention of abiding by His ‘rules’ if you will may fall and fail and come to Him again and again begging forgiveness and be forgiven, but they don’t come to Him saying, “I’m going to keep on sinning, Jesus, and you can’t turn me away no matter what I do”. . .
 
Jesus never said he would not turn away anyone. At least not using that exact phraseology anyway.
 
Last edited:
I don’t believe I said (or even implied) that anyone get a “free pass” to sin, etc. But who can say if someone is repentant or not? In many / most cases the priest doesn’t have any idea how someone lives their life. So I just think that aside from some extreme situations people should be allowed to receive the eucharist. If they are “unworthy” its between them & the Lord, we will all face our judgement day.
 
“How can we know if they are repentant”
Confession, they go to confession.
 
OK, so if a woman who was abused by her husband gets a civil divorce (not an official church anulment) and goes to confession then she can receive the eucharist? Works for me…
 
As long as she has not remarried no problem.

Nobody is turned away from Mass.
 
As long as she refrains from marrying, then it should be fine I believe.
No one is turned from Christianity if they are repentant and truly want to be in the Church. Then in full communion with the Church they may take Communion.
 
I wouldn’t stop my children eating food but they must wash their hands first.

People need to reconcile with Christ.
 
Nobody ever supplied the reference, so here it is:

“All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.” John 6:36, KJV

Note that this has nowhere the near the same meaning as giving the Eucharist to unrepentant, practicing sinners.

D
 
DaveBj said:
Note that this has nowhere the near the same meaning as giving the Eucharist to unrepentant, practicing sinners.
Click to expand...
Didn’t Judas partake in the last supper, the origin of the Eucharist? Jesus knew what he had done but didn’t deny him.
 
TheButler said:
Didn’t Judas partake in the last supper, the origin of the Eucharist? Jesus knew what he had done but didn’t deny him.
Click to expand...
At that point Judas hadn’t “done” anything, other than make a verbal agreement with the Jewish religious leadership. He still had a chance to not-do what he had promised to do.

D
 
Actually no, he did not say that consistently. He was actually quite prone to rants about gnashing of teeth and wailing for those who do not repent and follow his commandments. Shaking dust off of your shoes and taking your peace back onto you when witness of the faith of the Apostles is rejected. Much to the consternation of the universalists and modernists. I support closed communion. It is sound practice. That said, blessings to outsiders I am fine with. The perfect solution. Sincere, and it retains the integrity of the faith. I do not see the point in all this fuss against them. I refer to crossed shoulders/blessings given during communion.
 
DaveBj said:
At that point Judas hadn’t “done” anything, other than make a verbal agreement with the Jewish religious leadership. He still had a chance to not-do what he had promised to do.

D
Click to expand...
Matthew 26 says:
14 Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests,
15 And said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver.
16 And from that time he sought opportunity to betray him.
17 Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?
18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.
19 And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the passover.
20 Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve.
21 And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.

The deal was done and Judas was intent on fulfilling his part of the bargain.
 
DaveBj said:
I would repeat myself, but it’s obviously not going to sink in.

D
Click to expand...
Doesn’t the Church say that a thought is as good as a deed? Even thinking about adultery is adultery, for example.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top