praying with non-Catholics

[O.S.Luke]

Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists - all embrace the real presence of Christ at the table. They are NOT just words.

Thanks for the condescension, though. I have noted on occasion at retreats catholics often ask, “What does compline mean.”

I don’t think ignorance is confined to Protestants.

 

[ctos]

Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists - all embrace the real presence of Christ at the table. They are NOT just words.

You mean something, okay. In this case, you know that by “Real Presence” we mean that Christ is truly, really, and substantially present in the Blessed Sacrament. But you use the word meaning just cosmically present, or around, or something more general. When I observe the clash, it worries me to consider praying with Protestants. Protestants have long rejected a proper understanding of grace, and the fullness of what God has done for us. So I’m not sure what it really means to pray with them. And I don’t think they like praying with me, either. They think I’m superstitious and part ‘pagan’. Some of what Protestants do is so abhorrent I have no idea even how to respond. For example, once I saw a Lutheran ministress being interviewed on the News Hour. I felt pity, revulsion, and horror at the sight of her. So deluded, so absurd, so out of place, so fake. What am I supposed to do with that kind of figure someday, when as a priest I am told I must pray with her, at a funeral or something? Don’t my gestures give assent to the basic position another person represents?

 

[O.S.Luke]

As far as Real Presence, we - along with the Eastern Church - are content to let the Mystery be a mystery. Christ is present, but we don’t pretend to know how.

You are painting with a very large brush the actions of some and relegating them to all of us. I certainly don’t judge the actions of some Catholics, even priests, and lump all Catholics thus.

Protestants have long rejected a proper understanding of grace, and the fullness of what God has done for us.

You evidently don’t know much about the history of Methodism - an Anglican movement founded on grace, means of grace and sanctifying grace through the sacraments.

There are knuckleheads out there, CTOS. Catholic and Protestant, priests and pastors. Don’t judge their faith by their actions - you’ll be disappointed every time.

Pax vobiscum,

O+

 

[hermitcrab]

“As far as Real Presence, we - along with the Eastern Church - are content to let the Mystery be a mystery. Christ is present, but we don’t pretend to know how.”

That is beautiful; thank you

 

[ABostonCatholic]

What about those who DO believe in the Real Presence? My tradition does.

Lutherans = consubstantiation = The substance of Christs body is added to the substance of the bread and wine under the same accidentals

Catholics = transubstantiation = The substance of Christs body replaces the substance of the bread and wine under the same accidentals

Those are not the same. The former teaching says that the bread and wine remain bread and wine in addition to becoming the Body and Blood of Christ, whilst the latter says that the bread and wine are no longer bread and wine but the Body and Blood of Christ.

You can call it “Belief in the real presence” if you like, but the belief is not the same.

 

[ABostonCatholic]

Your posts have helped me. I feel especially aided by ABostonCatholic’s post. I wonder if we could expand it a little. What about liturgical settings. For example, what about a Catholic priest and a Protestant minister. What may they do together?

I don’t know what the specifics are. Certainly they could both lead together a prayer meeting or bible study that doesn’t involve Communion.

 

[hermitcrab]

"Christians won’t pray with other Christians? How absurd… and possibly detrimental to one’s soul.

As far a “closed communion” (an oxymoron, at best)… it is the height of arrogance to think that Jesus and the Eucharist needs our protection - as if!!!"

Amen…

Although “absurd” is not the word I would use; sadness.

Maybe the OP should read the Ruffin bio of Padre Pio, who prayed with all who came to him. Just a thought…

 

[yessisan]

I have prayed with DH and he’s not Catholic. I have felt good about doing this with him. Makes me feel closer to him even though he’s a JW. At least we can have God in our marriage in that sense.

 

[catsrus]

Praying with them is one thing, to a point. I’m very careful about that and usually just bow my head respectfully as they do the praying.
THem claiming to have The Real Presence in the Eucharist, is relatively a new position for protestants and, of course, not true in the way we know that Christ is present.
I’ve noticed in the past couple decades that protestants also like to use the word “priest” to describe their ministers.
I was a lutheran for most of my life, before God opened my eyes, and I never heard of a lutheran “priest”. Or of a methodist “bishop” either - and I have methodist relatives.
If they want to BE Catholic, why don’t they jump the Tiber instead of just using our terms?

originally posted by homewardbound
All Protestant churches I’ve been to will not allow non-members to partake in communion.

Well I don’t know what churches you’ve been to.
I know that lutherans, methodists, the church of god, the jws,
the hungarian reformed church, the presbyterians and the church of light in christ, allow anyone at all to participate in their communion.
I know this because I have been to all these different churches and have been offered their communion.
And every one of these churces just passed the containers up and down the pews.

 

[ctos]

Can you summarize in a sentence or two Padre Pio’s point of view?

 

[ctos]

As far as Real Presence, we - along with the Eastern Church - are content to let the Mystery be a mystery. Christ is present, but we don’t pretend to know how.

We believe in order to understand. In faith we have reasoned out the basics of how it must work: the conclusion that the accidents remain and the substance changes is given a name so it may be referred to clearly: the process is called “transubstantiation”. We’re not pretending to know “how”, we are concluding that the accidents change and the substance changes, and we are naming the process with one convenient term.

 

[yessisan]

Well I don’t know what churches you’ve been to.
I know that lutherans, methodists, the church of god, the jws,
the hungarian reformed church, the presbyterians and the church of light in christ, allow anyone at all to participate in their communion.
I know this because I have been to all these different churches and have been offered their communion

I’m sorry to say but JWs will NOT allow ANYONE partake on their communion because they do not have such thing. The only thing close to it is only a once a year thing called a “Commemoration”. The only ones allowed to do this are the “anointed” class (those who will go to heaven and reign with Jesus). I don’t know if you’re talking about the part where everyone who attends this yearly Commemoration is allowed to pass the unleavened bread and the wine down so everyone gets to touch the plate holding the bread and the glass holding the wine, but NOONE but the “anointed” JWs can partake on this.

Is that what you meant? Hope you don’t take me wrong by saying all this.

 

[catsrus]

yessian, Somehow I just knew you’d catch that!
When I "studied’ with the jws, granted, 25 years ago, I recall them referring to their once per year “communion” as something else but I do remember what they called it.
There was a plate with bread cubes that was passed up and down the benches or rows of chairs.
The “annointed ones” were supposedly the only ones who were to partake, but since only the “annointed ones” knew who they were themselves, anyone could partake and no one else was permitted to question them.
There was nothing to prevent anyone at all from eating from that plate of bread cubes.
That’s what I meant about “anyone” being able to commune - so to say, with the jws.

The church of God gave communion (bread cube and grape juice) to my 8 year old daughter!

 

[yessisan]

yessian, Somehow I just knew you’d catch that!
When I "studied’ with the jws, granted, 25 years ago, I recall them referring to their once per year “communion” as something else but I do remember what they called it.
There was a plate with bread cubes that was passed up and down the benches or rows of chairs.
The “annointed ones” were supposedly the only ones who were to partake, but since only the “annointed ones” knew who they were themselves, anyone could partake and no one else was permitted to question them.
There was nothing to prevent anyone at all from eating from that plate of bread cubes.
That’s what I meant about “anyone” being able to commune - so to say, with the jws.

The church of God gave communion (bread cube and grape juice) to my 8 year old daughter!

Since you put it that way, then yes you could be right. But woudn’t the JWs know you have heavenly hope? If I were one, I’d tell everyone I had this so-called hope… Anywho, if anyone has this “hope” they’d basically worship you… I wish I could see someone who went as a guest taking their bread and wine. I wonder what today’s JWs would say…

Are you glad you’re a Catholic? You can receive the Eucharist any day you go to Mass if you’re not in a state of sin. I sure am glad I am one (but still do wish I could be part of the Communion you know, because of the JW husband thing…)

 

[ctos]

Praying with them is one thing, to a point. I’m very careful about that and usually just bow my head respectfully as they do the praying.

Can you put into words the nature of your reluctance?

 

[O.S.Luke]

Some corrections:

THem claiming to have The Real Presence in the Eucharist, is relatively a new position for protestants and, of course, not true in the way we know that Christ is present.

That has always been the claim of Anglicanism/Methodism.

I’ve noticed in the past couple decades that protestants also like to use the word “priest” to describe their ministers.

Not in Methodism. Anglican clergy (as far as I know) have always been priests.

Or of a methodist “bishop” either - and I have methodist relatives.

Since the beginnings of Methodism there have been bishops. Do a Google of Francis Asbury and Thomas Coke - the first bishops.

I know this because I have been to all these different churches and have been offered their communion.
And every one of these churces just passed the containers up and down the pews.

No Methodist church I have ever served or been in served communion in the pews. And it’s not “their” communion. It’s Christ’s.

Pax,

O+

 

[O.S.Luke]

We believe in order to understand. In faith we have reasoned out the basics of how it must work: the conclusion that the accidents remain and the substance changes is given a name so it may be referred to clearly: the process is called “transubstantiation”. We’re not pretending to know “how”, we are concluding that the accidents change and the substance changes, and we are naming the process with one convenient term.

I understand, CTOS - did my thesis on Real Presence in seminary under the direction of catholic sacramental scholars.

The problem with transubstantiation is that it’s a Western term, born of Thomism and Aristotelian philosophy. In short… the wrong discipline to explain a mystery/sacrament (mysterion). I think the Eastern Church has it right: it’s the body and blood of Christ. No explanation or naming needed.

We’ll disagree. I hope amicably.

O+

 

[O.S.Luke]

Lutherans = consubstantiation = The substance of Christs body is added to the substance of the bread and wine under the same accidentals.

Luther never said the phrase “consubstantiation.” Nor does the Lutheran Church ever embrace it. In fact, most Lutheran bodies reject the term in official statements. Wikipedia’s entries are not accurate on this matter at all.

Using metaphysical terms and philosophies in regards to the Holy Mystery seems antithetical to me. Christianity did fine for 11 centuries before coining transubstantiation. When rationalism became all the rage, the Church felt like it should follow suit.

It’s the Body and Blood of Christ. Period. Why say more?

O+

 

[aurora77]

Some of what Protestants do is so abhorrent I have no idea even how to respond. For example, once I saw a Lutheran ministress being interviewed on the News Hour. I felt pity, revulsion, and horror at the sight of her. So deluded, so absurd, so out of place, so fake. What am I supposed to do with that kind of figure someday, when as a priest I am told I must pray with her, at a funeral or something? Don’t my gestures give assent to the basic position another person represents?

I’m troubled by these statements. We’re talking about our fellow Christians, not satanists. I have a problem with female ministers as well, but they don’t “repulse” me. If anything, I feel sad that so many of our brothers and sisters in Christ just don’t have the full truth about Him and His Church. It’s like they’re eating Big Macs and are content when they could be dining on steak and lobster, KWIM. They love God, but they simply don’t know the fullness of Him.

DH and I occasionally go to church with his parents, who attend a non-denom Christian Church. When it comes time for communion, I’m always saddened. They have this strong belief, but when it comes down to it, they are just eating bread and grape juice. They could know Him in Holy Communion, but they don’t know that. Our role as Catholics is to bring the fullness of the faith and to pray for our protestant brothers and sisters.

I’m not in any way implying that we should look down on our separated brothers and sisters; that’s not the case at all. For the most part, the protestants I know are very devout in their study of Scripture and they really do have that personal relationship with Christ. We need to respect them as Christians, but we also need to be ready to talk about our faith and show how wonderful it is.

 

[ctos]

I am troubled too, because I feel I must adjust my attitude somehow, and this is why I started this thread. I need to make sure that I am seeing non-Catholics correctly.