Which Catholic doctrines are currently being challenged by emerging christianity?

[Ignatius]

Part of my travels included attending yesterday’s funeral service for a friend, a former Catholic. This service was a “mass”, celebrated by a woman, which mimicked nearly every element in the Catholic Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. On a table, there was a circular loaf of bread and some wine which were blessed. There were readings, a psalm, and a homily.

The program for this service included “Liturgy of the Eucharist” …

The only thing that could prevent God’s personal individual presence of Sanctifying Grace within us who are living is that we humans, with our marvelous gift of free choice, could securely close the door to our heart having first removed the handle on the outside.

So do you believe that the priestess validly confected The Eucharist?
Do you believe that after the consecration it was the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ?

 

[grannymh]

Hi Granny,

If people do remove the handle, they do so without knowing what they are doing.

Clarification. I am referring to humans.

Jesus has a way of getting in anyway, remember? Omnipotence can defeat all ignorance.

Please recall that I am referring to humans who have an intellective free will as part of their human nature.

Jesus was there, Granny; there is not a grain of doubt in my mind about that. He was there in all the people present individually as His temples, and He was there collectively as two or more people gathered in His name.

Jesus is also present in the Gospel. However, remember that Catholic teaching is that it is God Who is present in the Consecrated Eucharist which we can receive into our very being. In my observation, this reality has been challenged in numerous ways. This means that one has to physically set aside time in order to delve into the Mystery of the Eucharist (Gospel of John, chapter 6.)

Would denying His presence in that funeral, though, be a removal of the handle?

Please recall that I made it plain above that I am referring to humans who have an intellective free will as part of their human nature.

If so, then the handle is removed in ignorance.

Please recall that I made it plain above that I am referring to humans who have an intellective free will as part of their human nature.

All of us have plenty of awareness to gain.

Which is obvious from this discussion.

Christ finds a way.

Please recall that the Catholic Holy Eucharist is a very special way.

Thanks for calling my attention to this in the other thread. Jesus broke bread with us,

Perhaps it is time to recall the events of the Last Supper. Now I may be older than dirt, but I was not a guest there. What Jesus did was to institute the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

Granny, I never use those terms in the context of our Communion in a flippant or dismissive way, only in a revering way.

God Bless.

There was plenty of reverence regarding communion by the celebrant of the funeral worship service. Those who accepted the welcome to communion were reverent with the bowls of broken bread. But I would not call that “our communion”. Catholic communion is so very different because of the valid Consecration. Different opinions like symbolism do not change that fact.

 

[grannymh]

So do you believe that the priestess validly confected The Eucharist?

Pardon my stupidity. What does validly confected mean? I normally use the word Consecration. There was no valid Consecration in the mimicry described in the beginning two paragraphs of post 109.

Do you believe that after the consecration it was the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ?

Because there was no valid Consecration due to the absence of a properly ordained Catholic male priest, there would not be the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ – no matter what kind of prayers were said.

 

[grannymh]

So do you believe that the priestess validly confected The Eucharist?

No

Do you believe that after the consecration it was the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ?

No

 

[Ignatius]

Pardon my stupidity. What does validly confected mean? I normally use the word Consecration. There was no valid Consecration in the mimicry described in the beginning two paragraphs of post 109.

Because there was no valid Consecration due to the absence of a properly ordained Catholic male priest, there would not be the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ – no matter what kind of prayers were said.

That’s a relief, I’m glad I misunderstood what your were saying in that post.

Many blessings.

 

[grannymh]

That’s a relief, I’m glad I misunderstood what your were saying in that post.

Many blessings.

Guess that means that I was successful in keeping out my own feelings when writing those first paragraphs in post 109.

Yet, my mental self during the actual worship service was in turmoil. That is why I commented “I could feel Christ on His cross wanting to come to this funeral in His Real Presence in the Real Eucharist.”

I can relate to women wanting to be priests. As a very young child, I thought I would like to be a priest. I knew that a new priest would come back to his own parish to celebrate his first Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Then one night I had a kind of nightmare. I had been ordained a priest and there I was beginning my first Mass with family, friends, and parishioners who came to celebrate this great event. I was o.k. with the first part of the Mass. And the Consecration went rather well. In my dream, I looked at the bread and wine. I could not take my eyes off the Real Presence of Jesus Christ. I could not continue. I could not move. I could not say another word of the Mass. I froze in love for Jesus.

Fortunately, I woke up. All I could wonder about was how real priests could move on after the Consecration, which is so powerful. Shortly after that dream, I definitely decided that I would not be a good priest because I could not continue beyond my first Mass.

I still have that wonderment about real priests. It helped me realize that the Real Presence is the summit of our Faith. It does not make a difference if only men are priests. That should not hinder my love for Jesus. The goal of both men and women is the same. We are to unite ourselves with Our Lord and stay united until we are in the presence of the Beatific Vision.

While it is true that the male priesthood is being challenged, the real challenge seems to be the loss of the true Catholic Eucharist and the Divinity of Jesus Christ in chapter 6, Gospel of John.

I need many blessings. Thank you.

 

[simpleas]

Guess that means that I was successful in keeping out my own feelings when writing those first paragraphs in post 109.

Yet, my mental self during the actual worship service was in turmoil. That is why I commented “I could feel Christ on His cross wanting to come to this funeral in His Real Presence in the Real Eucharist.”

I can relate to women wanting to be priests. As a very young child, I thought I would like to be a priest. I knew that a new priest would come back to his own parish to celebrate his first Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Then one night I had a kind of nightmare. I had been ordained a priest and there I was beginning my first Mass with family, friends, and parishioners who came to celebrate this great event. I was o.k. with the first part of the Mass. And the Consecration went rather well. In my dream, I looked at the bread and wine. I could not take my eyes off the Real Presence of Jesus Christ. I could not continue. I could not move. I could not say another word of the Mass. I froze in love for Jesus.

Fortunately, I woke up. All I could wonder about was how real priests could move on after the Consecration, which is so powerful. Shortly after that dream, I definitely decided that I would not be a good priest because I could not continue beyond my first Mass.

I still have that wonderment about real priests. It helped me realize that the Real Presence is the summit of our Faith. It does not make a difference if only men are priests. That should not hinder my love for Jesus. The goal of both men and women is the same. We are to unite ourselves with Our Lord and stay united until we are in the presence of the Beatific Vision.
While it is true that the male priesthood is being challenged, the real challenge seems to be the loss of the true Catholic Eucharist and the Divinity of Jesus Christ in chapter 6, Gospel of John.

I need many blessings. Thank you.

Just out of interest. That only men offer up the sacrifice of the Mass doesn’t hinder your love for Jesus, but a women doing the same act of offering up the sacrifice would?

As you say, the goal is the same for both.

BTW having a dream that you were so in love with Jesus doesn’t sound like a nightmare.

Thanks.

 

[grannymh]

Just out of interest. That only men offer up the sacrifice of the Mass doesn’t hinder your love for Jesus, but a women doing the same act of offering up the sacrifice would?

As you say, the goal is the same for both.

BTW having a dream that you were so in love with Jesus doesn’t sound like a nightmare.

Thanks.

Oh dear me. Woe is me.

Maybe I should just hang my head in shame and leave.

 

[simpleas]

Oh dear me. Woe is me.

Maybe I should just hang my head in shame and leave.

I’m just interested in how others know that a women being a priestess would be wrong in God’s eyes…and not just because the Pope said so. I’ve been reading the documents on that website that was posted afew posts back, and if what is contained on there to be actual church documents I can see why many people are now thinking more about women as priestess.
It’s very interesting.

 

[Peter_Plato]

I’m just interested in how others know that a women being a priestess would be wrong in God’s eyes…and not just because the Pope said so. I’ve been reading the documents on that website that was posted afew posts back, and if what is contained on there to be actual church documents I can see why many people are now thinking more about women as priestess.
It’s very interesting.

Except that it really isn’t up to those people to determine what is right or wrong in God’s eyes. It may, in fact, not even be a matter of right or wrong, but simply this is the way God wills it to be. He may have his reasons which are not ours to question.

When were there ever women priestesses in Judeo-Christian tradition? Where did God ever hint that he willed women priestesses to celebrate liturgy in the Judeo Christian tradition? Sometimes it is simply a matter of this is what God willed, based upon his reasons which he will divulge in his time.

It isn’t a moral question, at all. But that, in itself, does not make it a question that should be up to us to determine. No, God, you cannot have your way in this, we want it our way! Seems arbitrary and prideful on our part to make demands concerning what is not ours to decide in the first place.

God makes bread and wine into his Body and Blood. Why do we presume it is our right to question that, merely because we think it should have been different? Suppose we feel tomato juice and rice cakes would be more in tune with our wishes? Does God have no say? Can he not have reasons which are not ours to question?

Isn’t there a question of allowing another person their own determination BECAUSE they are another person? My wife likes spinach salad. I honour that preference because I honour her as an autonomous being with a self-determining right to make that choice. Does God not have a similar self-determining right to choose his way concerning women priests?

It seems to me that if God wills men to be priests, who are we to say he’s wrong on that? Seems the height of audacity to even suggest we have some kind of say in how God wills sacred liturgy to operate, no? It isn’t ALL about us, now is it?

 

[davidv]

Just out of interest. That only men offer up the sacrifice of the Mass doesn’t hinder your love for Jesus, but a women doing the same act of offering up the sacrifice would?

If the difference was only man v. woman, you might have a point. The Sacrament of Holy Orders was established by Jesus at the last supper. Each of the seven Sacraments has prescribed matter and form. In the case of Holy Orders the matter must be a human male.

As you say, the goal is the same for both.

Why do you the that the goal is the determining factor?

BTW having a dream that you were so in love with Jesus doesn’t sound like a nightmare.

Thanks.

I don’t believe of love of Jesus was the source of the nightmare.

 

[grannymh]

I don’t believe of love of Jesus was the source of the nightmare.

Yes, you are absolutely correct that the source of “Then one night I had a kind of nightmare.” (from post 122 above) is not my love for Jesus. As I have now figured out – The real nightmare is that the love of Jesus for us was truncated, stopped before Jesus could love us by giving Himself to us under the appearance of the Consecrated Bread.

When we consider Jesus’ love for us, as demonstrated in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, I wondered why that love could be missed in post 122. Today, as I stepped back, I recalled reading some ideas that pointed to the “breaking of bread” with those who have different ideas from us as being very important because what is primary important is the goal to be in communion. The funeral worship service (described in post 109 above) serves as one example of how communion with others can be accomplished.

Peter Plato (post 126 above) makes some eye-opening points. In my humble opinion, these points can lead to whether or not we believe in chapter six, Gospel of John. These points are part of this discussion.

It is not easy (in our world of Google’s instant answers) to find out how the Holy Eucharist is one of the main Catholic teachings which is currently being challenged six ways to Sunday. One of the challenges attacks the reception of Holy Communion which is an essential part of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

As I look back at my childhood dream described in post 122, I now recognize that Jesus could not “enter under my roof” (words in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass) if the Mass ended at the Consecration. Jesus would not be able to reciprocate my love for Him.

Yes, ideally it would good to be in communion with others at that funeral worship service described in post 109 with the picture of Christ knocking at the door. But breaking bread, realistically or figuratively, without receiving the True Presence of Jesus because the celebrant was not validly ordained according to the Catholic Sacrament of Holy Orders – that is an extreme nightmare which takes my breath away.

 

[Peter_Plato]

Yes, ideally it would good to be in communion with others at that funeral worship service described in post 109 with the picture of Christ knocking at the door. But breaking bread, realistically or figuratively, without receiving the True Presence of Jesus because the celebrant was not validly ordained according to the Catholic Sacrament of Holy Orders – that is an extreme nightmare which takes my breath away.

I agree with you on this.

What these individuals are doing is having the pretentious and disgraceful audacity to tell God that his supreme gift to humanity isn’t quite the way it should be and doing it their way would make it better.

It completely misses what the essential nature of the gift is - it is God giving HIMSELF to us in the manner in which he has determined.

Can you imagine a receiver of a gift telling the human giver of that gift that it isn’t quite what they wanted? Even on the merely human level, that would be ungracious.

Here, however, we have humans telling the Supreme Creator of all that exists that his gift of HIMSELF to us is not quite right and we feel some kind of compulsion to change it to better suit our tastes.

 

[simpleas]

Except that it really isn’t up to those people to determine what is right or wrong in God’s eyes. It may, in fact, not even be a matter of right or wrong, but simply this is the way God wills it to be. He may have his reasons which are not ours to question.

Those people? How do we know what are God’s reasons for anything? Because someone has always told us.

When were there ever women priestesses in Judeo-Christian tradition? Where did God ever hint that he willed women priestesses to celebrate liturgy in the Judeo Christian tradition? Sometimes it is simply a matter of this is what God willed, based upon his reasons which he will divulge in his time.

If there were never priestess/deaconess’ it does not mean there could never be any. Where did God hint that he would never will it to be so?

It isn’t a moral question, at all. But that, in itself, does not make it a question that should be up to us to determine. No, God, you cannot have your way in this, we want it our way! Seems arbitrary and prideful on our part to make demands concerning what is not ours to decide in the first place.

I don’t think it is about demanding that we do it our way.

God makes bread and wine into his Body and Blood. Why do we presume it is our right to question that, merely because we think it should have been different? Suppose we feel tomato juice and rice cakes would be more in tune with our wishes? Does God have no say? Can he not have reasons which are not ours to question?

Who is questioning the presence of Our Lord?

Isn’t there a question of allowing another person their own determination BECAUSE they are another person? My wife likes spinach salad. I honour that preference because I honour her as an autonomous being with a self-determining right to make that choice. Does God not have a similar self-determining right to choose his way concerning women priests?

Male and Female bare Christ’s image.

It seems to me that if God wills men to be priests, who are we to say he’s wrong on that? Seems the height of audacity to even suggest we have some kind of say in how God wills sacred liturgy to operate, no? It isn’t ALL about us, now is it?

It isn’t all about us, it’s all about men, just as if it was women, it would be all about women. How about it being about both? How does a man represent Christ in the way that a women couldn’t?It shouldn’t be about gender.

Thanks

 

[simpleas]

Yes, you are absolutely correct that the source of “Then one night I had a kind of nightmare.” (from post 122 above) is not my love for Jesus. As I have now figured out – The real nightmare is that the love of Jesus for us was truncated, stopped before Jesus could love us by giving Himself to us under the appearance of the Consecrated Bread.

When we consider Jesus’ love for us, as demonstrated in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, I wondered why that love could be missed in post 122. Today, as I stepped back, I recalled reading some ideas that pointed to the “breaking of bread” with those who have different ideas from us as being very important because what is primary important is the goal to be in communion. The funeral worship service (described in post 109 above) serves as one example of how communion with others can be accomplished.

Peter Plato (post 126 above) makes some eye-opening points. In my humble opinion, these points can lead to whether or not we believe in chapter six, Gospel of John. These points are part of this discussion.

It is not easy (in our world of Google’s instant answers) to find out how the Holy Eucharist is one of the main Catholic teachings which is currently being challenged six ways to Sunday. One of the challenges attacks the reception of Holy Communion which is an essential part of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

As I look back at my childhood dream described in post 122, I now recognize that Jesus could not “enter under my roof” (words in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass) if the Mass ended at the Consecration. Jesus would not be able to reciprocate my love for Him.

Yes, ideally it would good to be in communion with others at that funeral worship service described in post 109 with the picture of Christ knocking at the door. But breaking bread, realistically or figuratively, without receiving the True Presence of Jesus because the celebrant was not validly ordained according to the Catholic Sacrament of Holy Orders – that is an extreme nightmare which takes my breath away.

I didn’t miss the love you expressed for Jesus in post #122, I did not understand how you thought of it as a nightmare because you froze in that love.
I see now what you meant by it.

 

[simpleas]

If the difference was only man v. woman, you might have a point. The Sacrament of Holy Orders was established by Jesus at the last supper. Each of the seven Sacraments has prescribed matter and form. In the case of Holy Orders the matter must be a human male.

Why do you the that the goal is the determining factor?

I don’t believe of love of Jesus was the source of the nightmare.

I don’t think it is man v women, that is my point.

The goal is for both male and female to have a relationship with God through Christ Our Lord.

 

[Peter_Plato]

It isn’t all about us, it’s all about men, just as if it was women, it would be all about women. How about it being about both? How does a man represent Christ in the way that a women couldn’t?It shouldn’t be about gender.

Thanks

Sure, let’s ignore all the subtle hints along with the clear messages. If we weren’t clobbered over the head and had our noses rubbed in it, then we can’t be sure of any of it, so let’s ad lib it all.

Is the magisterium of the Church authoritative or not?

Clear as you can be.

 

[grannymh]

I didn’t miss the love you expressed for Jesus in post #122, I did not understand how you thought of it as a nightmare because you froze in that love.
I see now what you meant by it.

Pardon me. It was the love of Jesus for us which was missing in post 122, the original description of the dream. When I reviewed the dream, I now discovered that Jesus’ love for us was missing because my “Mass” dream ended, that is froze, before the gift of Holy Communion.

In the Catholic Church, the gift of Holy Communion comes through the hands of the Priest who is acting in the Person of Christ. Christ, in His human nature, did not assume human nature in the female form. Being female, with two female hands, at the same time one is male, with two male hands, is a clear example of the basic principle of non-contradiction. One person cannot be male and female at the same time. This is a simple contradiction.

 

[simpleas]

So basicly what we should believe is that a female could never be ordained and should never offer the sacrifice of the mass to God. Only a male is ordained and capable then to offer the sacrifice up to God.

This may have been very easy to accept and understand years ago, but to some people it seems out of date. When the church used to believe things like :

Canon 2. “Menstruous women ought not to come to the Holy Table, or touch the Holy of Holies, nor to churches, but pray elsewhere.”

So I understand were it can seem to be that women were thought of as lower than men for many years.
Thankfully we don’t believe these things anymore.

I don’t think it’s anyones right to be a priest, it’s a privilage. Just as I never thought that it was my right to be a extraordinary minister, that is a honor for me.

 

[simpleas]

Pardon me. It was the love of Jesus for us which was missing in post 122, the original description of the dream. When I reviewed the dream, I now discovered that Jesus’ love for us was missing because my “Mass” dream ended, that is froze, before the gift of Holy Communion.

In the Catholic Church, the gift of Holy Communion comes through the hands of the Priest who is acting in the Person of Christ. Christ, in His human nature, did not assume human nature in the female form. Being female, with two female hands, at the same time one is male, with two male hands, is a clear example of the basic principle of non-contradiction. One person cannot be male and female at the same time. This is a simple contradiction.

From post # 122

And the Consecration went rather well. In my dream, I looked at the bread and wine. I could not take my eyes off the Real Presence of Jesus Christ. I could not continue. I could not move. I could not say another word of the Mass. I froze in love for Jesus.

I read this to mean that you froze in love for Jesus and so could not continue with the mass.
You did however consecrate the bread and wine and could not “Take my eyes off the Real Presence of Jesus Christ” So as a female, ordained priest, you could consecrate the bread and wine.

I’m not going to try and interperate your own personal dream, you alone know what it meant.
That’s how I read it though.

Yep I get that a male priest is acting in the person of Christ, yet I don’t know where it is written that Jesus said only a male should “Do this in memory of me”
Our faith stems from the Jewish faith and as we know females did not preach God’s word, and so I think that is why this “rule” continued for many centuries.
We only had the approval of female altar servers in the 90’s I think.

It’s all very interesting, the history of Church Tradition.