What is happening with catholic communion for protestants

[AlbertDerGrosse]

So, then… is it the Eucharist that they cannot approach? Yes… precisely. A member of a Reformation community cannot approach their own minister for the Eucharist… so, who can they approach, with Catholic belief in the Eucharist?

This is some really tortured logic. That clause effectively has zero meaning and might as well be left out entirely if we use your assumptions.

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

That’s a whole 'nother question. What are the requirements for mortal sin, again?

Let me guess, in the same vein as your interpretation of “cannot approach their own minister” you’re next going to tell me that by definition a Protestant cannot be in mortal sin?

 

[Gorgias]

This is some really tortured logic.

Only if you assert that non-Catholic Christians receive the sacrament at the hands of their ministers.

That clause effectively has zero meaning and might as well be left out entirely if we use your assumptions.

No – it has precisely the meaning it’s intended to have: if a non-Catholic recognizes that the Sacrament of the Eucharist is being distributed, and wishes to receive the sacrament, then there’s a clause that offers that possibility to them. That’s not ‘tortured’ – that’s sacramental theology.

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

then there’s a clause that offers that possibility to them.

Under the condition that they are currently incapable of approaching their own minister for that sacrament, as they themselves understand the sacrament. A Lutheran who believes in the Real Presence doesn’t just believe that the Real Presence is in Catholic Masses, but in their Lutheran ones as well, otherwise they wouldn’t be Lutheran! Insisting that all Protestants satisfy the condition of not being able to approach their own ministers by virtue of being Protestant because the Catholic Church teaches that Protestants do not have a valid Eucharist renders the entire condition meaningless. If that is what the Church intended by that they wouldn’t bother with your silly rhetorical devices since, by definition, ALL Protestants meet the condition!

 

[ZMystiCat]

Protestants still believe in Communion. They just have a lower view of it than we do. They don’t see anything special about Communion in a Catholic church, but they may still view it as “valid” within their, again, low view. In this case, they may want to still participate alongside fellow Christians, and many Protestants do wonder why Catholics limit the Eucharist to just Catholics. To them, it’s a way for Christians to commune, possibly with a little sacramentality to it (if you’re Lutheran, Anglican, or Reformed), and Catholicism’s exclusivity appears to tell them that they aren’t Christian, at least in their mind.

 

[Gorgias]

Under the condition that they are currently incapable of approaching their own minister for that sacrament

That’s not what the canon says.

, as they themselves understand the sacrament.

Again, not what the canon says.

I get that this is your interpretation of the canon. Yet… is that the standard that we, as the Catholic Church, holds to? That an individual thinks that the successors of the apostles are mistaken?

A Lutheran who believes in the Real Presence doesn’t just believe that the Real Presence is in Catholic Masses, but in their Lutheran ones as well

Are you saying that they’re correct in that belief?

Insisting that all Protestants satisfy the condition of not being able to approach their own ministers by virtue of being Protestant because the Catholic Church teaches that Protestants do not have a valid Eucharist renders the entire condition meaningless.

No, I think it makes the condition about manifesting Catholic belief with respect to the sacraments meaningful.

If that is what the Church intended by that they wouldn’t bother with your silly rhetorical devices since, by definition, ALL Protestants meet the condition!

No, it doesn’t … since “ALL Protestants” don’t believe what the Church teaches about the sacraments.

To be fair, though, I’m not arguing for the bishop’s actions; just that @tseleehw is incorrect in asserting that the bishop is acting in contradiction to canon law.

 

[DoGodsBidding1]

I’m not Catholic yet but I plan on doing RCIA soon. So, the question is, can I partake in it yet?

No. Only after you go through RCIA and gain the understanding that it is not bread and wine, but the precious body and blood of our Savior. Through RCIA you learn about Catholicism and receive the Sacraments of Initiation so that you may worthily partake at the Supper of the Lord.

DGB

 

[help1]

The thing is, I do understand that…but I assume it’s just the law in the Church that I have to have done RCIA first, right? I raise no quarrels with this, mind you. I merely ask for clarification. I don’t believe it’s wrong to have it be this way, for the reason you mentioned. I guess it’s just with me as an individual, how does that work…

 

[DoGodsBidding1]

Start with talking to the Pastor at the Church you are attending. He will direct you from there. RCIA normally starts in the Fall and is completed at The Easter Vigil.

DGB

 

[SnowRose]

If I read the German discussion correctly, they were debating accepting longterm married practicing Lutheran-Catholic couples, w reconciliation beforehand required.
(I presume the fasting requirements etc apply as well).
This is opposed to just opening the doors to all and sundry non-Catholics, and it still sounds doubtful if the Reformed parts of the EKD are included, as they don’t hold with the Real Presence.

You can debate the legality of the concept forever, I’m just an interested observer at this point.
However, I can imagine the bishops considering losing parts of their flocks to a church where both spouses may receive the Eucharist, or to secularism.

 

[jlhargus]

seems like some bishops want to head in that direction though, I personally tink it’s a bad idea to go down that road

I agree, it will only cause a serious division within the Church at some point. To me it is teaching the truth of the gospel is of no importance.