L
- Status
M
Memaw
Guest
Ask him if he would be willing to talk to Father about it. He could explain it to him. God Bless, Memaw
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
Since the topic is CATHOLIC Communion, isn’t it reasonable for the Catholic church to assume they are correct about THEIR OWN belief system?
If I walked into a Baptist church right now and told them they need to start baptizing babies, how do you think that would work out for me?
G
Gorgias
Guest
Lantheria,
I noticed – with interest! – your description of your religion as ‘anathema’. My, what an interesting statement!
Unless I’m mistaken, you’re labeling yourself by the ‘anathemae’ that Trent pronounced. In other words, you’re (angrily? snarkily?) referring to yourself as “cursed by the Catholic Church.”
If so, then let me put your mind at ease: you’re not accursed. Those anathemae applied to the people of the time of Trent – that is, those who had been Catholics, but who personally left the Catholic Church and went to another faith tradition. These people – who had at one time been willing to be identified as Catholic – are the ones who are being anathematized. Only these people.
These anathemae do not apply to modern-day Protestants who had never been Catholics and had never ‘left the Catholic Church.’ So, you are not ‘anathema’. Therefore, there’s no need to keep that chip on your shoulder.
Glad we could clear that up for you.
P
Peebo
Guest
Only problem is you’ve emphasized the wrong words…actually Christ said…this is my body…do this in memory of me…same with the chalice…read John 6 where Jesus told those who followed him that unless they eat his flesh and drink his blood they don’t have life in them…when some of his follows argued that point he reiterated again to them…many thought it to hard to understand and left him… .same thing as those today…those who deny it or try to change the meaning to suit themselves because they can’t accept the words of Jesus…the early church believed it…nobody’s telling you what Jesus said by the way…you’re telling yourself what those early followers of Jesus told themselves and didn’t believe him…don’t blame the Catholic Church for following what Jesus Christ taught…his disciples believed him
M
Memaw
Guest
When Catholics talk about CHURCH, they are not speaking of a building where we worship. We are talking about the Church that Jesus Christ founded on Peter, our first Pope. (Mt 16:18-19 and Mt 18:17-18) and Her teachings she received from Jesus Christ and has kept faithfully for over 2,000 years. The Church HE said the Holy Spirit would guide it till the End of Time and the Gates of Hell would NOT prevail against it. The Church HE promised would NOT teach error. Catholics believe that Holy Communion is the TRUE Body and Blood of Jesus Christ just as HE said it would be, in John:6. And at the Last Supper. (Learn about some of the Miracles of the Eucharist). Read 1Cor 10:16 and 1 Cor 11:23-29. If you are converted to Christ directly, read what HE actually says about it. We should not make up our own minds about what Jesus means, we should take Him at His word!. Others wouldn’t even have a Bible if it weren’t for the Catholic Church guided by the HOLY SPIRIT.
Catholics receiving Jesus in Holy Communion, MUST be in the State of Grace, (free from serious sin), 1Cor 11:23-29. Our Communion is not just a symbol, it is TRUTH Himself!! Jesus prayed that “all would be ONE in Him”, but we can’t forget that HE is The WAY, The TRUTH, and The LIFE. "God Bless, Memaw
J
jediliz
Guest
even when my brother in law was Lutheran, before he converted, he knew not to receive the Catholic Eucharist. He usually stayed in the pew and then it was easy to find our pew cause he was sitting there.
Ask him what he thinks John 6 is saying…if he says Jesus was not speaking literally, tell him that is why he can’t receive the Eucharist. Depending on the missalette in the pew, there might be an explanation why non Catholics can NOT receive the Eucharist. It would imply a unity that is not there.
Ask him what he thinks John 6 is saying…if he says Jesus was not speaking literally, tell him that is why he can’t receive the Eucharist. Depending on the missalette in the pew, there might be an explanation why non Catholics can NOT receive the Eucharist. It would imply a unity that is not there.
W
Wannano
Guest
I am saddened by what I have seen this morning by most posters on both sides. I am coming to the conclusion that there will never be a resolve. To many years have passed with people loving to hate.Lantheria,
I noticed – with interest! – your description of your religion as ‘anathema’. My, what an interesting statement!
Unless I’m mistaken, you’re labeling yourself by the ‘anathemae’ that Trent pronounced. In other words, you’re (angrily? snarkily?) referring to yourself as “cursed by the Catholic Church.”
If so, then let me put your mind at ease: you’re not accursed. Those anathemae applied to the people of the time of Trent – that is, those who had been Catholics, but who personally left the Catholic Church and went to another faith tradition. These people – who had at one time been willing to be identified as Catholic – are the ones who are being anathematized. Only these people.
These anathemae do not apply to modern-day Protestants who had never been Catholics and had never ‘left the Catholic Church.’ So, you are not ‘anathema’. Therefore, there’s no need to keep that chip on your shoulder.
Glad we could clear that up for you.
I would like clarification on what you have stated here re: anathema. If I hear you right you are saying that the only people that the Anathema applied to back at the time of Trent was the Catholics that left the Catholic Church for another church. You make reference that it does not apply to modern day Christians. So am I right in understanding that it also did not apply to the next generations of those original anathemaized?
I
Isca
Guest
I really think people genuinely don’t realise that there is an issue with non-Catholics receiving the Eucharist. I saw an old friend last night, haven’t seen her for over 30 years. She has always been a sincere Christian and attends an evangelical community church.
We talked about me becoming a Catholic, and she said “well, we are all Christians”. I agreed, because that’s right, we are. She then went on to say that she had several good friends who were Catholic, and she had been to Mass with them and received Communion (as she of course terms it).
I felt I had to say that we ask non-Catholics not to receive, even if they are confirmed Christians. She was quite surprised and said she certainly wouldn’t do it in the future. So there’s a long-standing, active Christian with Catholic friends, who wasn’t aware of this particular difference between Protestant and Catholic communion.
We talked about me becoming a Catholic, and she said “well, we are all Christians”. I agreed, because that’s right, we are. She then went on to say that she had several good friends who were Catholic, and she had been to Mass with them and received Communion (as she of course terms it).
I felt I had to say that we ask non-Catholics not to receive, even if they are confirmed Christians. She was quite surprised and said she certainly wouldn’t do it in the future. So there’s a long-standing, active Christian with Catholic friends, who wasn’t aware of this particular difference between Protestant and Catholic communion.
D
DeniseNY
Guest
Sorry if this has been asked, but why does he want to receive? What does he believe about the Eucharist?
P
Padres1969
Guest
First I would simply tell him that the Eucharist, also known as communion, is just that, an expression of communion with that Church. And in the case of the RCC and many other faiths (including many protestant denominations), they practice closed communion as they do believe receiving communion expresses explicitly that, communion with the RCC and the See of Rome. Your boyfriend believes neither of those things, that he is Catholic or that he submits to the See in Rome. So to receive communion with be to lie about these facts.
Additionally Catholics believe that the bread and wine of communion become the actual body and blood of Jesus. And as someone earlier mentioned when you receive in a Catholic mass you are agreeing that you submit to that belief, that you’re receiving the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ. Your boyfriend also does not believe that. So that would be yet another lie he’d be guilty of if he received.
Additionally too your boyfriend is not Catholic, so he has presumably not been to confession. Catholics believe it to be a grave sin to receive the Eucharist without having confessed your sins before hand that you’re aware of. By the Catholic view I’m sure your boyfriend is aware of some mortal sin he’s committed, and by extension is not in a position to receive even if he were Catholic.
Essentially I’d frame it that by receiving Catholic communion your boyfriend would be acting as a liar and a sinner. He should respect the beliefs of the Catholic Church and not receive, just as many Catholics don’t receive if they’ve not been to confession (like my Dad, hasn’t received Eucharist in well over 30 years). And if he objects just let him know that if you went to his church you, as a Catholic, would not receive communion at his church even if invited to do so for much the same reason even if his church has open communion.
P
Padres1969
Guest
Which I find odd. My church of course practices open communion with any baptized Christian, but even so, our Dean will go to the effort to invite everyone to the altar rail every week during announcements without fail because it’s presumed that people will NOT come up to receive the Eucharist/communion unless they’re invited to do so. That the default is to NOT receive unless you are a member of the church/faith. If more people are like your friend my dean may be wasting her time every week.
With regard to the RCC specifically, seems more people need to read the first page of the missal.
M
MT1926
Guest
Here is a quick answer from this web site.
The use of the word anathema has evolved during the history of the Church, and today it means the same thing as excommunication. (The word anathema is no longer officially used.) Because a person must be a Catholic to be anathema (excommunicated) the term does not apply to Protestants.
From this I would conclude if the next generation were not Baptized Catholic the term would not apply to them.
T
TC3033
Guest
Hi always,
I’ll try to do this shorthand from a non-denom’s point of view.
Have you ever asked your boyfriend why he feels this way, and how communion is different in his church (open vs. closed)? To most non-denominationals (and some other Protestants), communion represents the last supper. To us (them), it is a time where ALL baptized Christians are invited to the Lord’s table in Christian unity and in remembrance. To someone born and raised in that faith, it can be kind of a shock and a “you’re not good enough” when they experience denial at communion for the first time.
I too felt (and in some ways still do) discriminated against at time of communion when I go to Mass with my wife, kids, and extended family. It’s tough for some people to sit by themselves in the pew and have others look at them while they walk by, and the strange looks when you get up to let someone out and they wonder why you let them walk by.
A bit of “that’s nice you’re Christian, but not quite close enough”, if you will. A feeling of that others would prefer you weren’t there and in the way.
This in no means qualifies his actions where he demands the Eucharist, there is no excuse for that. He needs to respect the Catholic beliefs, but I can see where he is coming from. I waited 19 years before I was baptized and allowed to the Lord’s table, and now I’m able to receive communion like 4 times a year. It’s a tough pill to swallow for some people.
I’ll try to do this shorthand from a non-denom’s point of view.
Have you ever asked your boyfriend why he feels this way, and how communion is different in his church (open vs. closed)? To most non-denominationals (and some other Protestants), communion represents the last supper. To us (them), it is a time where ALL baptized Christians are invited to the Lord’s table in Christian unity and in remembrance. To someone born and raised in that faith, it can be kind of a shock and a “you’re not good enough” when they experience denial at communion for the first time.
I too felt (and in some ways still do) discriminated against at time of communion when I go to Mass with my wife, kids, and extended family. It’s tough for some people to sit by themselves in the pew and have others look at them while they walk by, and the strange looks when you get up to let someone out and they wonder why you let them walk by.
A bit of “that’s nice you’re Christian, but not quite close enough”, if you will. A feeling of that others would prefer you weren’t there and in the way.
This in no means qualifies his actions where he demands the Eucharist, there is no excuse for that. He needs to respect the Catholic beliefs, but I can see where he is coming from. I waited 19 years before I was baptized and allowed to the Lord’s table, and now I’m able to receive communion like 4 times a year. It’s a tough pill to swallow for some people.
E
Eric_Hilbert
Guest
General warning:
Stay on the topic, not each other.
Stay on the topic, not each other.
T
TC3033
Guest
This is quite true. This came up 2 summers ago at the time of my youngest niece’s baptism. So, both of my niece’s parent’s families are Catholics. My SIL’s husband has two other brothers, one of whom doesn’t practice Catholicism anymore.
About a week out from the baptism, the one brother told SIL’s husband that he wasn’t going to attend the Church service, but would meet the family for the reception. I guess SIL’s husband got pretty mad.
So…this is the story my SIL was telling my wife (Catholic) and they couldn’t understand why the one brother wouldn’t go to the Church service. SIL to my wife “TC goes to Church with us” My wife “Yes, he goes but…let’s be honest…we’re not the most welcoming to non-Catholics.”
Long story short to get to one line…
My SIL’s reply “TC can go receive the Body and Blood, nobody is going to notice”.
J
jane_doe
Guest
For those of you still struggling on understanding why this is a stumbling block for non- Catholics–
Say hypothetically you were traveling and thus attended Mass at a new parish. When it came time to recieve the Eucharist, you were told that you were not allowed, because you didn’t belong to this parish of “true Catholics”.
That is what it is like as an Evangelical to go to a Catholic Church and be denied the Lord’s Supper.
Say hypothetically you were traveling and thus attended Mass at a new parish. When it came time to recieve the Eucharist, you were told that you were not allowed, because you didn’t belong to this parish of “true Catholics”.
That is what it is like as an Evangelical to go to a Catholic Church and be denied the Lord’s Supper.
A
andrewstx
Guest
To me there is no such thing as a “non denominational” Christian. If there were they would all believe in different things separately. As for "just Christian"y, they do not exist either.
I was raised in such a denomination myself. They called themselves
Just "christians’, and al others the "non-Christians’. I think this is the height of arrogance.
I was raised in such a denomination myself. They called themselves
Just "christians’, and al others the "non-Christians’. I think this is the height of arrogance.
P
Padres1969
Guest
Doesn’t mean they don’t exist. My cousin is non-denominational, and describes himself as nondenominational or Christian interchangeably depending on the context.
As a more likely to happen hypothetical, lets say you’re a Catholic or Anglican such as myself, and you travel to visit a Lutheran Church in the Missouri Synod. You would be told you would be unable to receive their communion there (regardless of any restrictions your own faith might have on the matter). And it makes sense when you think about it, you’re not in communion with that church.
That’s why I don’t understand why anyone has an issue with this. It’s not like this is a unique trait of the Catholic Church. Many Christian denominations do not allow anyone but professed members in communion with their church to partake in communion, even among a single faith family. For example a member of the ELCA can’t receive at a LCMS church even though they’re both Lutheran.
To look at it in a more basic way. You don’t walk into someone else’s house you’re visiting and assume you’re going to be invited to stay for dinner. Many faiths will allow you to stay for dinner, or even invite you to specifically to dinner… but not all. You have to respect their wishes in that even if you don’t agree with it. And I’m saying this as a member of a faith with an open communion policy (to any baptized Christian) who much prefers this model. I may not particularly like the closed communion model, but I absolutely understand the reasons behind it and at the very least can respect and abide by it.
A
andrewstx
Guest
- Status