I am Going to My First Roman Catholic Mass Tomorrow

[Dauphin]

totustuus

Because of these abuses, you’re making the assumption that the OP’s priest doesn’t know what he’s talking about or taking liberties which he is not allowed.

The OP is Anglican and according to the information on the USCCB website, can be allowed to receive Holy Communion, if given permission by the ordinary, aka the Bishop. The Bishop, knowing the priest of his dioceses, can allow them to discern whether to allow a person to receive or not.

This priest who is the only authority in this matter, has given permission to the OP, and she should follow him, rather than the participants of a internet website.

BTW, your profile says that your 14 years old, yet you’re making statements like you know more than this priest.

Jim

If the Bishop has allowed this, he is committing an abuse by misusing Canon Law.

No danger of death and no “grave necessity” exists here. There is absolutely no excuse for this protestant to be allowed to receive Holy Communion. It’s absolutely incredible that so many Catholics are guided by blind acceptance of authority figures, instead of unchanging principles found in Divine Law.

 

[nsper7]

This priest who is the only authority in this matter, has given permission to the OP, and she should follow him, rather than the participants of a internet website.

I am a HE, not a SHE (at least the last time I checked…)

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I am a HE, not a SHE (at least the last time I checked…)

Sorry about that! Couldn’t tell from your handle.

God Bless
Jim

 

[Dauphin]

Dauphin, I hope you are not personally offended by my decisions, but you can understand why I would listen to the ordained Priest in charge of the parish. And I hope you know that I would never intentionally make the Eucharist a “plaything”. I do believe in the Real Presence and to dishonor the Eucharist is to dishonor Christ, His Church (the ‘One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church’ of which I hope and believe both Anglicans and Roman Catholics and all others who rightly call on the name of the Lord are part of) and the privilege I have been granted.

No person who is not subject to the Roman Pontiff is a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. I realise this sounds harsh, but I’m telling you these things out of charity so that you may not participate in an abuse.

There is only one Church, outside of which there is no salvation and no remission of sins. This is the Catholic Church governed by the Successor of St. Peter.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

No person who is not subject to the Roman Pontiff is a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. I realise this sounds harsh, but I’m telling you these things out of charity so that you may not participate in an abuse.

There is only one Church, outside of which there is no salvation and no remission of sins. This is the Catholic Church governed by the Successor of St. Peter.

And this is not what the Roman Catholic Church teaches.

Jim

 

[Dauphin]

And this is not what the Roman Catholic Church teaches.

Jim

Wrong. The doctrine of the Church doesn’t change.

*“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the “eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” *- Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino

No document published by the Church at any period in history even comes close the contradicting this, and it couldn’t, because the doctrine of the Church doesn’t change.

 

[nsper7]

Wrong. The doctrine of the Church doesn’t change.

“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the “eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” - Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino

No document published by the Church at any period in history even comes close the contradicting this, and it couldn’t, because the doctrine of the Church doesn’t change.

Well, there is a contradiction because several quotes from the Catechism and legitimate Roman Catholic Church bodies seem to give a different message.

 

[Dauphin]

Well, there is a contradiction because several quotes from the Catechism and legitimate Roman Catholic Church bodies seem to give a different message.

The thing is, they dont. This is simply a lie propagated by those who would have the Church change its doctrine.

The Catechism refers to invincible ignorance, which is not the subject at hand here. Obviously, those who suffer from invincible ignorance (ie. ignorance that cannot be overcome) can be saved without explicitly assenting to the Catholic faith as long as they have received a baptism of desire.

This is the traditional doctrine of the Church, put forward by the greatest theologians from the earliest times. It does not contradict - it doesn’t even touch - the infallible definitions of Popes which confirm strongly that heretics and schismatics cannot be saved. The invincibly ignorant cannot possibly be heretics or schismatics since it is not possible for them to gain any knowledge of Christ and His church.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Para. 847: This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation” (LG 16; cf. DS 3866-3872).

and from ; (bold is my emphasis

Congregation for the Doctrine
of the Faith
Declaration “Dominus Iesus”
on the Unicity and Salvific Universality
of Jesus Christ and the Church

**Furthermore, the salvific action of Jesus Christ, with and through his Spirit, extends beyond the visible boundaries of the Church to all humanity. **Speaking of the paschal mystery, in which Christ even now associates the believer to himself in a living manner in the Spirit and gives him the hope of resurrection, the Council states: “All this holds true not only for Christians but also for all men of good will in whose hearts grace is active invisibly. For since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery”.37
usccb.org/pope/doctrineoffaith.htm

Jim

 

[Dauphin]

Para. 847: This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation” (LG 16; cf. DS 3866-3872).

Jim

A perfect example of the misuse of clear teaching in an attempt to imply that a change has taken place.

This paragraph refers to invincible ignorance, and the possibility of receiving a baptism of desire - which is the traditional teaching of the Church. As I have already explained, it doesn’t even come close to contradicting the Papal teaching which I quoted above.

This is pure obfuscation on your part - attempting to introduce confusion into a very simple issue, scandalously presenting the teaching of the Church as if it contradicts previous teaching. There’s no excuse whatsoever for this hermeneutic of rupture. The Catholic faith* does not change*.

 

[Dauphin]

"Furthermore, the salvific action of Jesus Christ, with and through his Spirit, extends beyond the visible boundaries of the Church to all humanity"

We know for a fact that the grace of baptism is supplied outside of the Church - that even heretics validly baptise. So indeed, salvific action (ie. baptism) occurs outside the visible bounds of the Catholic Church, but this doesn’t mean that salvation is outside the Catholic Church. Baptised infants, for example, are united to the soul of the Catholic Church, integrated into it by baptism. If they are saved, they are saved in the Catholic Church.

This is what Dominus Iesus is saying - it is not speaking some heresy or introducing some contradiction with Catholic doctrine like you imagine. It does not say that heretics and schismatics can be saved - which is absurd. You must read the document in the context of Sacred Tradition and magisterial teaching. Otherwise, you can be easily mislead.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

From Catholic Answers website;

Salvation outside the Church

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, following historic Christian theology since the time of the early Church Fathers, refers to the Catholic Church as “the universal sacrament of salvation” (CCC 774–776), and states: “The Church in this world is the sacrament of salvation, the sign and the instrument of the communion of God and men” (CCC 780).

Many people misunderstand the nature of this teaching.

Indifferentists, going to one extreme, claim that it makes no difference what church one belongs to. Certain radical traditionalists, going to the other extreme, claim that unless one is a full-fledged, baptized member of the Catholic Church, one will be damned.

The following quotations from the Church Fathers give the straight story. They show that the early Church held the same position on this as the contemporary Church does—that is, while it is normatively necessary to be a Catholic to be saved (see CCC 846; Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 14), there are exceptions, and it is possible in some circumstances for people to be saved who have not been fully initiated into the Catholic Church (CCC 847).

Notice that the same Fathers who declare the normative necessity of being Catholic also declare the possibility of salvation for some who are not Catholics.
catholic.com/library/Salvation_Outside_the_Church.asp

I
Jim

 

[Dauphin]

From Catholic Answers website

They seem to agree with me. While there’s no salvation outside the Church, there are non-normative means of entering the Church, if one is suffering from invincible ignorance. In such cases, the grace of baptism, supplied through desire, is still necessary.

What has to be acknowledged clearly is that no heretic or schismatic can be saved, which is the subject at hand here. Nothing you’ve presented says that heretics and schismatics can be saved. If you want to keep on looking for Magisterial sources to back up your claim, you’ll be looking for a long time.

Every Catholic should be able to easily assent to the quote I gave above from Pope Eugene. The fact that so many are offended by it betrays their poor Catholic catechesis and their limited understanding of Catholic doctrine.

 

[totustuus2345]

totustuus

Because of these abuses, you’re making the assumption that the OP’s priest doesn’t know what he’s talking about or taking liberties which he is not allowed.

The OP is Anglican and according to the information on the USCCB website, can be allowed to receive Holy Communion, if given permission by the ordinary, aka the Bishop. The Bishop, knowing the priest of his dioceses, can allow them to discern whether to allow a person to receive or not.

This priest who is the only authority in this matter, has given permission to the OP, and she should follow him, rather than the participants of a internet website.

BTW, your profile says that your 14 years old, yet you’re making statements like you know more than this priest.

Jim

This may be, but I’m under the wing of a 16 year experianced Canon Lawyer, 10 of these years being spent in the Vatican, and he has explained questions like this to me, almost quoting word for word Canon Law, and he is my spiritual director, I’m sorry if I sound arrogant, but remember, Jesus was debating with the teachers in Jerusalem at 12, and I just want to defend the Eucharist

 

[saylo]

totustuus

Because of these abuses, you’re making the assumption that the OP’s priest doesn’t know what he’s talking about or taking liberties which he is not allowed.

This is not so, Jim. The things Totustuus is pointing out are overt signs of nonconformity by this priest…a kind of “free-wheeling improvisations.” The glass chalices have been ordered out of the Mass years ago and still some priests still use them…this is tantamount to a rebellious spirit, Jim. It is a very good example in perceiving compliance.

The OP is Anglican and according to the information on the USCCB website, can be allowed to receive Holy Communion, if given permission by the ordinary, aka the Bishop. The Bishop, knowing the priest of his dioceses, can allow them to discern whether to allow a person to receive or not.

Not so, again, Jim. No bishop is above Canon Law. He cannot appoint himself as an “arbiter” insofar as the Eucharist is concerned. He would be in grave error.

This priest who is the only authority in this matter, has given permission to the OP, and she should follow him, rather than the participants of a internet website.

Jim, an errant priest does not have the authority to grant such an enormous contradiction…not even the Pope would grant this. As far as being “just posters” here…well, that’s right but some of us are Catholics that have received the Holy Spirit in the sacrament of Confirmation. The Holy Spirit imbues in all of us the perceptiveness to recognize error when it comes before us. This is a classic case of just that. The great sacrament of Confirmation makes us “Christian soldiers of God…” This takes in recognizing error and speaking out against it, as in this case, Jim.

BTW, your profile says that your 14 years old, yet you’re making statements like you know more than this priest.

This is very presumptive of you, Jim. Being 14 can still be closer to God than many with more years accrued.

Saylo
Jim

 

[saylo]

This may be, but I’m under the wing of a 16 year experianced Canon Lawyer, 10 of these years being spent in the Vatican, and he has explained questions like this to me, almost quoting word for word Canon Law, and he is my spiritual director, I’m sorry if I sound arrogant, but remember, Jesus was debating with the teachers in Jerusalem at 12, and I just want to defend the Eucharist

You do not sound arrogant at all, Totustuus. You are forthright and are gaining great graces for defending the Eucharist. This (Eucharist) can very well be the symbol of your life.

I wouldn’t be in wonder if you had a special angel assigned to you. I read where some people have MORE than one angel. You may have one that is a monitor for the Eucharist and could be very close.

We are experiencing much desecration of the Holy Eucharist. If you read a recent story of a professor who walked out of a church with a host and defiled it and bragged about it.

Anyone who is a participant in the lessening of this great Sacrament will not be in the company of angels and the saints. But, then again, these folks do not believe in angels and saints…too bad.

 

[Shoshana]

The Eucharist is the Source and Summit of the Church’s Life and Mission! This is why we have daily Mass as it is the LIFE that sustains us on the road to holiness. That being said, it should be frowned upon that any, any person who receives the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ does not receive it in the state of grace.

That being said, and I will enter an area that few could disagree. The only consecrated Hosts that Satanists steal…are the Ones that are truly Jesus christ. And that being in the Catholic Church. Many break and enters have happened that they (the Satanists) have committed to get their hands on our Precious Gift. This Gift does not exist nowhere else but in the Tabernacles of eacn and every Catholic church.

I will enter another area where, when JP2 visited a parish church in the US, the police with their police dogs made sure there was no one in the building nor any bombs…security reason of course. The dogs sniffed but the dogs stopped in front of the Tabernacle and would not budge. It was their body language saying there was a human present in the building. The dogs were aware of His Presence!!! This does not exist outside the Catholic Church.

Not, tell me with these two very imprtant circumstances, how we cannot say that we consume Jesus.

Now, my question is this;

How come when an anglican vicar comes into the Catholic faith, why do they have to be ordained? Only because they have not been validly ordained at all. The succession is not there. And if, that being the case, only baptism is valid in the Anglican, nothing else is. The power of Spirit through the Magisterium is continuied throughout all the generations…the whole of lineage of 2,000 years.

And just because an anglican believes in their holy presence does not make it so. One can be sincerely wrong. And sincerity does not get one into heaven. If one experiences the Catholic Church and goes back into the anglican…this person whould be guilty of having experienced the Truth to a lesser truth.

To be simple here…our wonderful Eucharist is like a banquet that one consumes with the greatest of gratitude because the food is good and filling.

Any other eucharist is like going to McDonald’s. And this is where I need not use any other words…

May we always be wonderfully grateful for such a Gift that words cannot describe!:bowdown:

 

[jmcrae]

Well, there is a contradiction because several quotes from the Catechism and legitimate Roman Catholic Church bodies seem to give a different message.

Not really, no. There is only one Church, and every human being, whether he or she realizes it or not, is subject to the Roman Pontiff.

One-sixth of the world’s population self-identifies as Catholic, in union with the Pope in Rome. The other five-sixths are more or less connected, through Trinitarian baptism, through spiritual desire, or even through rebellion and hatred. There are very few who simply don’t know.

 

[nsper7]

The Eucharist is the Source and Summit of the Church’s Life and Mission! This is why we have daily Mass as it is the LIFE that sustains us on the road to holiness. That being said, it should be frowned upon that any, any person who receives the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ does not receive it in the state of grace.

Definitely agreed. Prior to receiving Communion at my Episcopal Church, I always confess any sins I know of (not usually to the Priest, but to God, often praying in the Chapel/at the Altar). When I receiving Communion at the Catholic Mass, I not only prayed/confessed to God, but I also received Absolution/Reconciliation.

That being said, and I will enter an area that few could disagree. The only consecrated Hosts that Satanists steal…are the Ones that are truly Jesus christ. And that being in the Catholic Church. Many break and enters have happened that they (the Satanists) have committed to get their hands on our Precious Gift. This Gift does not exist nowhere else but in the Tabernacles of eacn and every Catholic church.

I will enter another area where, when JP2 visited a parish church in the US, the police with their police dogs made sure there was no one in the building nor any bombs…security reason of course. The dogs sniffed but the dogs stopped in front of the Tabernacle and would not budge. It was their body language saying there was a human present in the building. The dogs were aware of His Presence!!! This does not exist outside the Catholic Church.

I have never denied that Roman Catholic Eucharist possesses the Real Presence. Thus, who are you trying to convince?

In terms of the Satanists/Atheists, remember that Roman Catholicism is the largest “denomination” (for lack of a better word) that believes in the Real Presence and they are very public about.

Not, tell me with these two very imprtant circumstances, how we cannot say that we consume Jesus.

Again, I do not deny that Roman Catholicism possesses valid Sacraments and the Real Presence.

How come when an anglican vicar comes into the Catholic faith, why do they have to be ordained? Only because they have not been validly ordained at all. The succession is not there. And if, that being the case, only baptism is valid in the Anglican, nothing else is. The power of Spirit through the Magisterium is continuied throughout all the generations…the whole of lineage of 2,000 years.

That question is for the Roman Catholic Church to answer. Anglicanism does recognize Roman Catholic Holy Orders as valid (which is why we do not ‘Confirm’ Roman Catholics since they are already validly Confirmed, but instead they are Received).

And just because an anglican believes in their holy presence does not make it so. One can be sincerely wrong. And sincerity does not get one into heaven. If one experiences the Catholic Church and goes back into the anglican…this person whould be guilty of having experienced the Truth to a lesser truth.

And just because a Roman Catholic does not believe in our (Anglican) Real Presence does not make it so either.

To be simple here…our wonderful Eucharist is like a banquet that one consumes with the greatest of gratitude because the food is good and filling.

…]

May we always be wonderfully grateful for such a Gift that words cannot describe!

Amen.

 

[jmcrae]

Has any Satanist ever tried to steal the Eucharist from an Anglican or Lutheran church?