Does anyone have bad stories from their Protestant days?

[Tezza]

This is news to me. I attended my first Catholic funeral service and took communion.

No one was asked if they were or were not Catholic. Just line up and take communion.

Hi, Christine.

Yeah, some preists are good about instructing the faithful at a funeral with the understanding that many present may not be Catholic. Others aren’t. If there is a missal in the pew, it is likely to have an explanation on the front inside or back inside cover (sorry, can’t remember exactly) explaining the restriction of reception of Communion for non-Catholics. I once saw a boy of about nine go up during a funeral, take the Communion (not in the usual form of on the tongue of cupped in the hand), walk away while putting it in his pocket. I walked over and quietly addressed the issue with his parents.

Just my one cent (state of the economy

Peace.

 

[Peter_J]

This is news to me. I attended my first Catholic funeral service and took communion.

No one was asked if they were or were not Catholic. Just line up and take communion.

Hi Christine2009. Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox both practice closed communion, but we differ a little on the procedure. Specifically, a Catholic priest will assume that each person who comes forward for communion is Catholic (unless he has reason to believe otherwise); whereas an Orthodox priest, if he sees someone in line who is unknown to him, will ask that person if they are Orthodox.

 

[Peter_J]

Sounds like something that might have happened between some priests.
Maybe not “saved always saved” but perhaps,“Mother Mary will save my soul”.

I think it would be more like “I’ll do this today, then I’ll just go to confession tomorrow.”

 

[phoenix3212]

Sounds like something that might have happened between some priests.
Maybe not “saved always saved” but perhaps,“Mother Mary will save my soul”.

Educated priests wouldn’t say that. Mother Mary simply intercedes for us before God, rather than saves us.

Unfortunately Peter J is right. Some Catholics have the attitude of “I can always go to Confession later,” without realizing that sincerity is necessary for the sacrament to work.

 

[kalt]

I can only speak for the OFFICIAL understanding of the Eucharist in the United Methodist Church, which DOES believe in the Real Presence, and the Eucharist is a sacrament.

I do believe in the Real Presence of Christ. So does my denomination. You question my pain? How arrogant.

I’m sorry that I sounded so blunt. It’s not your imagination–I was blunt. I think you don’t understand. Catholics believe that only those validly ordained can consecrate the host. So, the fact that you believe that the Eucharist in the UM church is the real presence, proves that you don’t believe what Catholics believe about the Eucharist.
Catholics first recieve the sacrament in First Holy Communion. If you believed in the Echarist as a Catholic does, you wouldn’t expect to participate if you hadn’t prepared for (studied) and recieved your First Holy Communion. Also, to recieve communion, you must first confess any serious sins to a priest in the sacrament of Reconciliation. This is another sacrament that you must study for. If you believed in the Eucharist as Catholics do, you would also believe in sacramental confession, because you can’t recieve Communion if you have comitted any serious sins and haven’t made a good confession (you would know what a good confession by studying to recieve that sacrament.).

So, you see, you don’t believe in the Catholic sacrament, Communion. You don’t believe what the Catholic Church believes. If you did, you would convert to Catholicism, because this is where you would find the real presence.

Not recieving communion in the Catholic Church really bothers you–so much that you can’t attend your family’s weddings and funerals. Maybe the Catholic Church is your true home, and not being a member in full communion is what’s making you feel astranged and hurt.

We’re all Christians, but we aren’t all in full communion. Do you want to be in full communion with the Catholic Church? Have you studied what the Catholic Church is, what it teaches?

This isn’t a sales pitch. It’s not a conversion request. If you’re happy in the UMC, I’m not suggesting you shouldn’t be. It just seems that you think that the UMC and the CC have the same beliefs about the Eucharist, which isn’t true. I’m wondering which is really your belief. Maybe you were just unaware of the differences?

I am told that this is an illicit practice in Catholicism.

A wedding is a worship service where the sacrament of matrimony takes place. I don’t sit stewing. But it is painful to “half participate” in a Mass where Christ is present and I am not allowed to partake. So I choose not to come and participate, and will pray for the couple during the daily offices of that day. If a nuptial mass is not celebrated, I will certainly be there.

 

[kalt]

Sounds like something that might have happened between some priests.
Maybe not “saved always saved” but perhaps,“Mother Mary will save my soul”.

My god, that’s an ignorant statement.

If you’re going to poke fun at Catholic beliefs, you have to pick something that Catholics actually believe. Otherwise you make no sense and just sound uninformed–some would say prejudiced. I’m not of the “some”.

 

[kalt]

Wucharist? Stay classy, kalt.

That’s a typo (the w is next to the e). What in the world did I say with that typo. I’m afraid to find out! Will I need the Urban Dictionary?

Why would you think we don’t look at a person’s first reception of Holy Communion as a sacrament? If you want to know what the Episcopal Church really teaches about Holy Communion, look it up in our catechism.

If you belief about the Eucharist was identical to the CC’s belief, you wouldn’t believe that you have the real presence in the Eucharist in your church.

It’s really so easy to understand the difference.

BTW, you would have to recieve your First Holy Communion in a church that has the real presence. That’s not your church, according the CC. You would also have to confess your sins in the sacrament of Reconciliation. To do that, you would have to go to a Catholic priest. Confession to a priest or minister of another faith won’t do.

The beliefs really aren’t the same.

You believe we both have the real presence. Catholics believe that you don’t.

If you shared Catholic beliefs on the Eucharist, you wouldn’t believe that your church has the real presence in the Eucharist.

I’m not saying that you have to change your beliefs about your own eucharist, but I’m pointing out that your beliefs don’t jive with the CC’s.

 

[kalt]

I think you are all forgetting about the Sacrament of Confession here…. And when we should not take Communion. And why we would do more harm to our non-Catholic Christian brothers and sisters if we allowed them to partake….I would much rather have you mad at us/me then placing your soul in peril.

I just got on this morning, and I’m trying to point out how their belief in the Eucharist and ours differ. If they had identical beliefs about he Eucharist, they would also have to accept sacrmental Confession. They would have to accept that their own church doesn’t have the real presence.

It’s really and easy thing to see. I think feelings get hurt and they just want to breeze over the differences.

And that’s one of the biggest differences, I think. They seem to think that they can pick and choose what they want to believe about the Eucharist in the CC and still participate.
That is a very unCatholic way of thinking.

If you believe what the Catholic Church teaches about the Eucharist, you would know that you have to be Baptized, Catholic, have made a good, sacramental Confession, and recieved your First Holy Communion (a sacrament).

If you believed as Catholics believe, you wouldn’t think that you could (or should be able to) recieve Communion in the CC as a Protestant.

 

[kalt]

Kalt:

A non-Catholic receiving a blessing at the Eucharist in a Catholic mass IS illicit, according to this thread.

O+

I read that thread. Very interestng.

You wouldn’t have gone up anyway, I suspect.

 

[O.S.Luke]

I read that thread. Very interestng.

You wouldn’t have gone up anyway, I suspect.

Actually, I have gone up before. I don’t see what’s so funny about it.

 

[kalt]

Actually, I have gone up before. I don’t see what’s so funny about it.

You said that you have sat in the pews and that you have walked out.

You didn’t make it sound like you would have gone up for a blessing.

I read the link that the other poster provided.

It sounded like they’re saying that Communion isn’t the time for other blessings to be done. Communion is for communion. Blessings are for another time. The writer mentioned that everyone, regardless of religion, is blessed at the end of the Mass. So, no one needs to feel that they haven’t recieved a blessing at a Catholic Mass.

No one has said whether they’ve researched the info to tell if it’s good info or not.

As I said yesterday, my son’s school had everyone come up at Communion time.

I would love to know if the info provided is accurate.

 

[kalt]

Hi Stephen,

The Roman Catholic Church would NEVER rebaptise my Children but they recognise my children’s baptism. We have the real presense of our Lord at our Eucharist. We also have Confession. Here is a great link to Reconciliation of a Penitent (Confession) in the Episcopal Church.
youtube.com/watch?v=pbWH1yILLII

The Catholic church acknowledges all Christian baptisms. Some Protestant denominations don’t accept Catholic baptisms (among others).

You are forgetting apostolic succession.

Again, your beliefs and the CC’s teaching don’t match up. The CC teaches that you don’t have the real presence in the Eucharist because you don’t have apostolic succession. Only a validly ordained person can consecrate the host, accordiing to the CC.

If your beleifs and the CC’s were in accord, you would say that your church doesn’t have the real presence in the Eucharist. You would know that you have to recieve that, except for Baptism, you would have to have recieved the sacraments in the CC.

If you don’t believe these things, then you don’t believe what the CC teaches about the Eucharist. And I say that no one should be put out by not being able to particpate in something they don’t even believe in.

An act of Love, to deny a Christian to the Lord’s Supper? Good luck with that one!

The Catholic Church teaches that no one should recieve the Eucharist “unworthily”. (It would be a serious sin.) This means that many Catholics cannot recieve the Eucharist as well. Divorced and remarried people can’t recieve. Couples that use artificial birth control can’t recieve. Anyone who has commited a serious sin that they haven’t confessed in the sacrament of Reconciliation, and Catholics who haven’t made their First Holy Communion can’t recieve.

There are a lot of adults who were never sent to CCD classes by their parents. They were baptized but never recieved their Frist Holy Communion or made their First Confession. These adults cannot recieve the Eucharist at Mass, though they are Catholics.

Those who have recieved those Sacraments but haven’t made their Confirmation (another sacrament) can’t be named god parents. As far as I know, they also can’t be married in the Church.

The rules apply to Catholics, too, so why are you non-Catholics so upset about this? It’s as if you feel like you’re being singled out.

This is the belief. If you truly do share this belief, convert. If you don’t share this belief, admit that you don’t.

Whatever you decide, just quit being drama kings and queens about it.
God Bless!

 

[O.S.Luke]

Kalt:

I’m sorry that I sounded so blunt. It’s not your imagination–I was blunt. I think you don’t understand. Catholics believe that only those validly ordained can consecrate the host. So, the fact that you believe that the Eucharist in the UM church is the real presence, proves that you don’t believe what Catholics believe about the Eucharist.
Catholics first recieve the sacrament in First Holy Communion. If you believed in the Echarist as a Catholic does, you wouldn’t expect to participate if you hadn’t prepared for (studied) and recieved your First Holy Communion. Also, to recieve communion, you must first confess any serious sins to a priest in the sacrament of Reconciliation. This is another sacrament that you must study for. If you believed in the Eucharist as Catholics do, you would also believe in sacramental confession, because you can’t recieve Communion if you have comitted any serious sins and haven’t made a good confession (you would know what a good confession by studying to recieve that sacrament.).

I understand, Kalt. Give me credit for that.

I am well aware of the liturgical and sacramental theology of Catholicism; I studied it for several years. And I agree - receiving the Eucharist without confession of sin is a very poor practice. I never receive without confession of sin, nor do I celebrate a Eucharist without the Confession of Sin, Pardon, and Passing of the Peace - all which are a part of UMC liturgy. I know you don’t think my orders or anyone else’s orders in my tradition are valid. That is your right (and expectation) as a Catholic.

So, you see, you don’t believe in the Catholic sacrament, Communion. You don’t believe what the Catholic Church believes. If you did, you would convert to Catholicism, because this is where you would find the real presence.

I am not sure you can “believe” in a sacrament; sacraments are sacraments whether we believe in them or not (I don’t think there is any such thing as a “Catholic” sacrament - sacraments are sacraments). A sacrament is a means of grace; an outward and visible sign of that grace.

Not recieving communion in the Catholic Church really bothers you–so much that you can’t attend your family’s weddings and funerals. Maybe the Catholic Church is your true home, and not being a member in full communion is what’s making you feel astranged and hurt.

Not receiving communion in ANY church would bother me. I would think it would bother any Christian that takes the Eucharist seriously as a Christian discipline, practice, and sacrament.

We’re all Christians, but we aren’t all in full communion. Do you want to be in full communion with the Catholic Church? Have you studied what the Catholic Church is, what it teaches?

I probably know the Catechism and church history as well as you do, Kalt, as well as Canon Law where liturgy and worship are concerned. No, we are not in full communion. We share a common baptism. It is a little odd that we try to protect that which Jesus gave us to unite. I would think that those who are estranged are the ones who need Christ the most.

I don’t think sharing the body and blood is a sign of oneness about all things Christian (since that doesn’t even exist among those who recognize valid orders and sacraments, such as Catholicism and Orthodoxy) - sharing the Body and Blood is a sign and action of the Real Presence of Christ that we as Christians share as Lord and Savior.

This isn’t a sales pitch. It’s not a conversion request. If you’re happy in the UMC, I’m not suggesting you shouldn’t be. It just seems that you think that the UMC and the CC have the same beliefs about the Eucharist, which isn’t true. I’m wondering which is really your belief. Maybe you were just unaware of the differences?

I know the differences. We believe, as do the Orthodox and Anglicans, that Christ is really present at the Eucharist, without being able to fully explain that presence (nor with a need to explain it).

I am not asking Catholicism to change. I am just sharing with you the pain of seeing Christ fully present in the midst of the people and not being allowed to partake - that is a pain that I cannot endure, so I choose not to place myself in that situation. I love Christ too much not to partake of his Body and Blood when it is present.

O+

 

[kalt]

I understand, Kalt. Give me credit for that.

I am well aware of the liturgical and sacramental theology of Catholicism; I studied it for several years. And I agree - receiving the Eucharist without confession of sin is a very poor practice.

And again your beliefs may differ from Catholicism’s. Recieving without “going to” Confession is perfectly OK, so long as you haven’t commited a serious sin. If you’ve commited a serious sin, you must go to Confession. If you don’t, recieviing is a sin, not just poor practice.

I never receive without confession of sin, nor do I celebrate a Eucharist without the Confession of Sin, Pardon, and Passing of the Peace - all which are a part of UMC liturgy. I know you don’t think my orders or anyone else’s orders in my tradition are valid. That is your right (and expectation) as a Catholic.

And it’s why your beliefs about the Eucharist differ from Cacholicisms. You say your belief is the same, yet you say that your Eucharist has the real presence. That’s not in line with Catholic belief.

I am not sure you can “believe” in a sacrament; sacraments are sacraments whether we believe in them or not (I don’t think there is any such thing as a “Catholic” sacrament - sacraments are sacraments). A sacrament is a means of grace; an outward and visible sign of that grace.

Not receiving communion in ANY church would bother me. I would think it would bother any Christian that takes the Eucharist seriously as a Christian discipline, practice, and sacrament.

I have no problem not recieving Communion in other churches. It’s not allowed, and it doens’t bother me.

Again, you’re showing that you don’t have the same understanding of the Eucharist.

I probably know the Catechism and church history as well as you do, Kalt, as well as Canon Law where liturgy and worship are concerned. No, we are not in full communion. We share a common baptism. It is a little odd that we try to protect that which Jesus gave us to unite. I would think that those who are estranged are the ones who need Christ the most.

Is changing the truth about the Eucharist the way to reach them? All of these “rules” apply to Catholics as well as Protestants. You say that you know the CC. Then why do you think you’re being singled out? You know that Catholics who haven’t made their First Holy Communion or who haven’t been to Confession after commiting serious sin also can’t recieve. These are the rules that apply to you, also.

I don’t think sharing the body and blood is a sign of oneness about all things Christian (since that doesn’t even exist among those who recognize valid orders and sacraments, such as Catholicism and Orthodoxy) - sharing the Body and Blood is a sign and action of the Real Presence of Christ that we as Christians share as Lord and Savior.

To receive the Eucharist in the CC, you have to be in full communion with the Church. You don’t share the CC belief about the the Eucharist, even.

I know the differences. We believe, as do the Orthodox and Anglicans, that Christ is really present at the Eucharist, without being able to fully explain that presence (nor with a need to explain it).

I am not asking Catholicism to change. I am just sharing with you the pain of seeing Christ fully present in the midst of the people and not being allowed to partake - that is a pain that I cannot endure, so I choose not to place myself in that situation. I love Christ too much not to partake of his Body and Blood when it is present.

Again, your beliefs about the Eucharist are not the beliefs of the CC. You’re getting upset because you can’t participate in something that you don’t believe in. If you truly believed in the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist, you would convert. You wouldn’t spend another day away from the Eucharist.

Look at the posts of the people here who have recently converted. Read the eagerness when they write about looking forward to Easter, when they will recieve the Sacraments for the first time.

If your beliefs were the same, the answer to this situation would drive you to seek true communion with the CC. You would beat a path to the altar. Nothing would stop you. Nothing else would do. You would understand how Catholics can go to a Protestant weddings and not give a fig about not recieving their Communion.

O+

 

[kalt]

This is the Q&A I found on a UM site.

This seems to disagree with what you say about what the UMC teaches. Do you have a link to a UMC site that has a different take on things?

revneal.org/communionfaq.html

 

[O.S.Luke]

This is the Q&A I found on a UM site.

This seems to disagree with what you say about what the UMC teaches. Do you have a link to a UMC site that has a different take on things?

revneal.org/communionfaq.html

What you are referring to is NOT a UMC site, Kalt. It’s a private website. The official teaching can be found here. Basically, “The Wesleyan tradition affirms the reality of Christ’s presence, although it does not claim to be able to explain it fully.” Just because a UM says something doesn’t make it true. I’ve heard Catholics say things about their own faith that I know aren’t true; consult official doctrinal statements to know what our beliefs are. No, our belief on the Real Presence it does not agree with Catholicism. Nor does Orthodoxy’s agree with Catholicism. I never claimed otherwise.

You are antagonizing me and saying things I didn’t say. I’m not Catholic. I have great respect for Catholicism. I’m not asking Catholicism to change because of a peon like me. I shared with you why it is painful for me to go, and you seem to want invalidate the pain as well as my faith. I don’t see how this conversation helps; I was invited to share my understanding, and you feel the need to invalidate it and call me ignorant.

You would understand how Catholics can go to a Protestant weddings and not give a fig about not recieving their Communion.

It’s not ANYONE’S communion. It’s the Body and Blood of Christ. And I doubt if you speak for all when you say that they don’t give a fig about it. I suspect there are a lot of people grieved over the fact that we don’t break bread together.

Pax vobiscum,

O+

 

[Peter_J]

What you are referring to is NOT a UMC site, Kalt. It’s a private website.

Ah … I figured something was up with that website. I mean why would the UMC website have the url “revneal.org”? :ehh:

 

[kalt]

What you are referring to is NOT a UMC site, Kalt. It’s a private website. The official teaching can be found here.

From the site you provided.

"We do not embrace the medieval doctrine of transubstantiation, "

As I said, you don’t hold the same beliefs about the Eucharist as Catholics. You don’t believe in transubstantation. This is what the United Methodist minister’s site also said.

Basically, “The Wesleyan tradition affirms the reality of Christ’s presence, although it does not claim to be able to explain it fully.” Just because a UM says something doesn’t make it true. I’ve heard Catholics say things about their own faith that I know aren’t true; consult official doctrinal statements to know what our beliefs are. No, our belief on the Real Presence it does not agree with Catholicism. Nor does Orthodoxy’s agree with Catholicism. I never claimed otherwise.

When I said that we hold different beliefs about the Eucharist, you countered that UMs believe in the real presence, implying that the beliefs were the same and there should be no reason for not allowing non-Catholic Christians from recieving in the Catholic Church.

You are antagonizing me and saying things I didn’t say.

Can you give an example?

I’m not Catholic. I have great respect for Catholicism. I’m not asking Catholicism to change because of a peon like me. I shared with you why it is painful for me to go, and you seem to want invalidate the pain as well as my faith. I don’t see how this conversation helps; I was invited to share my understanding, and you feel the need to invalidate it and call me ignorant.

No, now you are again assigning motivations (as you do about the Eucharist in the CC) that aren’t there. I have no intention of invalidating your faith. But I do suspect that your pain is coming from you awareness, no matter how vague, that not being in communion with the One, True, Church is more than just an unfortunate circumstance because of arbitrary rules (as many non-Catholics see the situation). You seem to realize that this goes to the heart of Christian unity. You know that this unity is more than a passing comment and agreement that we all believe in Jesus.

I never said that your religion is invalid, As I said, very plainly, in another post, if you are happy in your church, I am not suggesting that you should change your beliefs. I am** not **trying to convert you, and I said that very clearly in another post, too.

I do have to add now, though, that you don’t seem to be very happy with the situation. You are extremely upset that you are not in full communion with the Catholic Church, even after being informed that the same rules apply to Catholics. It seems to me that there is more to your feelings about this situation than just displeasure with Catholic rules on who can and can’t recieve Communion.

It’s not ANYONE’S communion. It’s the Body and Blood of Christ. And I doubt if you speak for all when you say that they don’t give a fig about it. I suspect there are a lot of people grieved over the fact that we don’t break bread together.

Grieved that the Church is fragmented, but not grieved that we can’t recieve communion in the denomoninations that aren’t in full communion with the Church. We aren’t sorry that we can’t receive in other churches.But we are sorry that so many Christians are still not in communion with Her.

Pax vobiscum,

O+

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Be honest. You’re not “sorry” to hear it.

I know that the EC has kept a lot of Catholic form. We’re not so far removed. However, your Wucharist is not exactly the same thing.

If you believed in the Catholic Eucharist, you would believe that you would first recieve in your First Holy Communion, a sacrament.

I think you want to separate things, believing that it’s the real pressence, but chucking the sacrament of First Holy Communion.

If you believed in that, you wouldn’t feel hurt by not recieving.

The writer, I believe, is UM.

I have no idea why you would suspect my motives. I am sorry when anyone doesn’t understand even the basics of anothers faith. I feel bad when I find out things I think I should know of someone else’s faith certainly.

I don’t have a clue what a Wucharist is. We have the Eucharist and use essentially the same form of consecration. In what sense do you think it is different?

We consider it a sacrament the same as you do. I certainly believed that upon my first communion in the RCC.

I have no clue what you think you know, but your idea that we believe in the real presence but not some “first holy communion” is not making any sense. I have no clue what you think you are meaning.

I don’t know what you refer to by UM.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Probably wrong?

You’ve spent the afternoon posting slaps on the writsts to other posters, and here you are saying that you would receive comminion in the Catholic Church though you know full well that it’s wrong.

Check your own eye. (Boy that wink is the perfect icon this time. )

PS:Why wouldn’t you go up to Communion in a church where you were known, but only where you aren’t known? You’re a rebel only when you know you won’t be caught?

You’re a bit over the top. I spent about 15 min. here yesterday…hardly all afternoon posting. I suspect I posted about 4 things all told. As regards this topic, how would you lke it if someone started a thread entitled, “tell us your bad stories from the RCC?” You’d be upset, and hurt, and would have every right to be so.

I don’t agree that I have no right to receive communion anywhere my friend. I don’t accept your Church’s position that it is God’s table is reserved for a select few. I accept that RC’s would not agree and that it was probably not right to do so. I’ve never actually been faced with the situation, so what I would do is conjecture.

I simply indicated that I would be less likely to go to communion where it was known that I was not Catholic so as to not embarrass those people I was there with. It has nothing to do with being a rebel.

You seem determined to be angry. I have no clue why. I bear you no ill will.