Why don't Catholics have Open Communion?

[dzheremi]

What is the point of lamenting closed communions if you don’t also lament the doctrinal irregularities that make them absolutely necessary, and work to correct those irregularities in your own thinking? I don’t get it. You don’t believe what the Catholic Church teaches, and yet you want to commune with it? Why? In my personal experience, the first thing I did when I realized that there was more behind my doubts in some Catholic doctrine than simple obstinacy was to voluntarily remove myself from communion (while still attending the Mass; later I stopped doing that, too). I may not agree with Catholicism on some key issues and doctrines, but I definitely respect the sacraments and the communion (as well as the positions of the other apostolic churches I am studying) enough to know that I should not receive them unworthily, that is to say, without complete and willing submission to the faith they are an integral part of. Such submission can really only come from actually being a member of the communion in question. Merely wanting to receive is not enough.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

When I’ve been out of sorts, so to speak, with Catholicism or when I made numerous journeys to Anglicanism, never did I dare to even consider taking Communion in a Catholic parish…out of respect for their belief and the Sacramental system they hold dear, as you said…

What is the point of lamenting closed communions if you don’t also lament the doctrinal irregularities that make them absolutely necessary, and work to correct those irregularities in your own thinking? I don’t get it. You don’t believe what the Catholic Church teaches, and yet you want to commune with it? Why? In my personal experience, the first thing I did when I realized that there was more behind my doubts in some Catholic doctrine than simple obstinacy was to voluntarily remove myself from communion (while still attending the Mass; later I stopped doing that, too). I may not agree with Catholicism on some key issues and doctrines, but I definitely respect the sacraments and the communion (as well as the positions of the other apostolic churches I am studying) enough to know that I should not receive them unworthily, that is to say, without complete and willing submission to the faith they are an integral part of. Such submission can really only come from actually being a member of the communion in question. Merely wanting to receive is not enough.

 

[Carlan]

What is the point of lamenting closed communions if you don’t also lament the doctrinal irregularities that make them absolutely necessary, and work to correct those irregularities in your own thinking? I don’t get it. You don’t believe what the Catholic Church teaches, and yet you want to commune with it? Why? In my personal experience, the first thing I did when I realized that there was more behind my doubts in some Catholic doctrine than simple obstinacy was to voluntarily remove myself from communion (while still attending the Mass; later I stopped doing that, too). I may not agree with Catholicism on some key issues and doctrines, but I definitely respect the sacraments and the communion (as well as the positions of the other apostolic churches I am studying) enough to know that I should not receive them unworthily, that is to say, without complete and willing submission to the faith they are an integral part of. Such submission can really only come from actually being a member of the communion in question. Merely wanting to receive is not enough.

Dzheremi,thank you for this post, while I’m saddened that you are separated at this time, it is good that you continue to love and respect us, God bless you in your search and give you peace, Carlan

 

[rinnie]

What is the point of lamenting closed communions if you don’t also lament the doctrinal irregularities that make them absolutely necessary, and work to correct those irregularities in your own thinking? I don’t get it. You don’t believe what the Catholic Church teaches, and yet you want to commune with it? Why? In my personal experience, the first thing I did when I realized that there was more behind my doubts in some Catholic doctrine than simple obstinacy was to voluntarily remove myself from communion (while still attending the Mass; later I stopped doing that, too). I may not agree with Catholicism on some key issues and doctrines, but I definitely respect the sacraments and the communion (as well as the positions of the other apostolic churches I am studying) enough to know that I should not receive them unworthily, that is to say, without complete and willing submission to the faith they are an integral part of. Such submission can really only come from actually being a member of the communion in question. Merely wanting to receive is not enough.

One Point to remember, the Sacraments are the MAIN part of our faith. And the Eucharist is the CENTER of our faith. To be honest the Communion that we take with our Lord and the Sacraments that we partake in are our whole reason for being. Because without God what is really Possible??? But with God!! Mountains can move.

Tell me what issue in our Church could possibly make you leave the Church? It would have to be one very very important issue???

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

That might be better as an IM as it is pretty off topic and personal

One Point to remember, the Sacraments are the MAIN part of our faith. And the Eucharist is the CENTER of our faith. To be honest the Communion that we take with our Lord and the Sacraments that we partake in are our whole reason for being. Because without God what is really Possible??? But with God!! Mountains can move.

Tell me what issue in our Church could possibly make you leave the Church? It would have to be one very very important issue???

 

[PRmerger]

The question was posed to me by a friend of mine. I know the answer from a Catholic perspective–it is a sign of unity of Faith and if you don’t believe what all the Catholic Church teaches then you should not partake, because “anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.” --1 Cor. 11:29

This friend in a Lutheran, and he believes in the True Presence, yet they have open communion at his church. He believes that if someone were to go to Communion and believe, Jesus would be present, but if they didn’t believe, He would not be.

The Eucharist is our nuptial relationship with God; it is our One Flesh Union with Jesus. It is our moment of spiritual and physical intimacy with our Lord. We are the Bride and He is the Bridegroom.

Apologist Tim Staples says (paraphrasing): If you haven’t made the commitment to the Catholic Church by “signing on the dotted line” so to speak, it’s like a man and woman engaging in the marital act (the One Flesh Union) without being fully committed (i.e married).

So even if a non-Catholic wants to receive Communion and professes to believe that it is indeed the Body/Blood/Soul and Divinity of Jesus, until he has fully committed and “made it legal” so to speak, he ought not be receiving. Just as a couple who truly love each other but are not yet fully committed to each other ought not be engaging in the One Flesh Union. (Our Church is nothing if not consistent in her teachings! )

“Since the “one flesh” union of man and wife foreshadowed Christ and the Church right from “the beginning,” John Paul II speaks of marriage as the primordial sacrament…This is why…the Eucharist is “the Sacrament of the Bridegroom and of the Bride.” When we receive the body of Christ into our own, in a mysterious way, like a bride, we conceive new life in us – life in the Holy Spirit. It is this same Holy Spirit that forms the bond that unites spouses in the Sacrament of Marriage.” Source.

So, if you haven’t “married” yourself to the Church, then receiving the Eucharist is the equivalent of engaging in pre-marital sex.

 

[Esdra]

So, if you haven’t “married” yourself to the Church, then receiving the Eucharist is the equivalent of engaging in pre-marital sex.

Just one thought: Actually, sadly enough, this happens a thousand times - pre-marital sex.

You know, I am living in a Catholic dominated country, and there are VERY few who don’t have sex before marriage. - But nearly all are baptised, and confirmed Catholics…

Esdra

 

[PRmerger]

Just one thought: Actually, sadly enough, this happens a thousand times - pre-marital sex.

You know, I am living in a Catholic dominated country, and there are VERY few who don’t have sex before marriage. - But nearly all are baptised, and confirmed Catholics…

Esdra

Hi, Friend Esdra! A happy 2011 to you…

Ok. I think I can read between the lines and get your insinuation: you are saying that Catholics are sinners who don’t follow the Church’s teaching, right?

If so, well, as you like to quote from Romans: all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

This is more an indictment of Catholics than it is of Catholic teaching.

The teaching that one must be wedded in order to enjoy the One Flesh Union is true, no matter how many Germans ignore it, eh?

 

[1beleevr]

Yeah, not much of a grey area there LOL…and the Church was about as pure catholic at that time as things could be!

It’s possible that you MAY be right!

 

[1beleevr]

Just one thought: Actually, sadly enough, this happens a thousand times - pre-marital sex.

You know, I am living in a Catholic dominated country, and there are VERY few who don’t have sex before marriage. - But nearly all are baptised, and confirmed Catholics…

Esdra

In fact it would be ridiculous to construe that catholics or anyone for that matter, have not had pre-marital sex! I’ll admit it; I had it before my first marriage; but not the second one!

 

[dzheremi]

The current conversation is really drifting far away from the OP, people. Can we get it back on track so that this thread isn’t closed?

I have a question for those who favor open communion:

If closed communion is not necessary on the basis of doctrinal differences, then what in your view(s) proves the necessity of open communion? What does it subsist in, if a shared faith is not necessary?

 

[Esdra]

Hi, Friend Esdra! A happy 2011 to you…

And to you , my friend!

Ok. I think I can read between the lines and get your insinuation: you are saying that Catholics are sinners who don’t follow the Church’s teaching, right?

No, actually I was not generalizing, but saying what I got to see. You know how those are called who don’t have sex before marriage nowadays here?
“Old fashioned, bigottig or even fundamentalist”

If so, well, as you like to quote from Romans: all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

I know that.

This is more an indictment of Catholics than it is of Catholic teaching.

No, it was not intended to be so. You see, the same goes for nearly all other Churches here as well. Starting from the Lutherans to the Presbyterians…

The teaching that one must be wedded in order to enjoy the One Flesh Union is true, no matter how many Germans ignore it, eh?

I AM NOT GERMAN and never will be! I am an Austrian. HUGE difference.
But anyway: I never denied that this isn’t the docrtine of the CC…
I just said what I got to know and saw.

Esdra

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I think the OP has been fully-answerd, Jeremy. Open Communion makes no sense from a Catholic or Orthodox point of view. It is crucial that believers of the Eastern communions or Western ones believe the theology, morality, and polity as well as catechesis of the respective body or else why step forward and live a lie? I think most of us agree that Communion is about more than communing with Our Lord, it is a meal of unity, concord, and spiritual cohesion in the Body of Christ as we are also the Body of Christ ourselves in this sublime meal and we are part of the Bride of Christ—the Church. And like I said, LCMS Lutherans have closed communion (WELS, too) and from their angle it is about ensuring good catechesis of their faith. So I think Closed Communion is truly the way to go and the Church has it right.

The current conversation is really drifting far away from the OP, people. Can we get it back on track so that this thread isn’t closed?

I have a question for those who favor open communion:

If closed communion is not necessary on the basis of doctrinal differences, then what in your view(s) proves the necessity of open communion? What does it subsist in, if a shared faith is not necessary?

 

[PRmerger]

I AM NOT GERMAN and never will be! I am an Austrian. HUGE difference.

My apologies!

But anyway: I never denied that this isn’t the docrtine of the CC…
I just said what I got to know and saw.

Esdra

Then what is your point? That Catholics do not follow the Church’s teaching and it should be changed? I don’t think that’s your point.

Why bring up this observation in the first place? We* all* have observed sinners in our churches. In fact, we’re all one of them, are we not?

 

[Esdra]

The current conversation is really drifting far away from the OP, people. Can we get it back on track so that this thread isn’t closed?

Agreed, back to topic!

I have a question for those who favor open communion:

If closed communion is not necessary on the basis of doctrinal differences, then what in your view(s) proves the necessity of open communion? What does it subsist in, if a shared faith is not necessary?

I would say: We all believe in the same Lord - Jesus Christ - and everyone who believes in Him is invited to His table. (Actually similar than the Presbyterians teach. 'Though I don’t have the document handy right now. - I’ve read that somewhere, either in one of their Confessions, or in the Heidelberg Catechism).

Esdra

 

[Esdra]

My apologies!

No problem.

Then what is your point? That Catholics do not follow the Church’s teaching and it should be changed? I don’t think that’s your point.

Well, actually many don’t… And I think this is in the US no different than here in AUSTRIA (not Germany; 'though there it might be similar! )

Why bring up this observation in the first place? We* all* have observed sinners in our churches. In fact, we’re all one of them, are we not?

We are, yes.
Well, it just came into my mind, when reading your comparison between the Holy Eucharist and marriage…
Actually, I’ve never been aware of that, until I became a Baptist. There this is taken VERY siriously. ('Though people there certainly do other sins. I won’t deny that.)

Esdra

 

[Carlan]

Agreed, back to topic!

I would say: We all believe in the same Lord - Jesus Christ - and everyone who believes in Him is invited to His table. (Actually similar than the Presbyterians teach. 'Though I don’t have the document handy right now. - I’ve read that somewhere, either in one of their Confessions, or in the Heidelberg Catechism).

Esdra

If you are a member of the Apostolic Catholic Church, you must not go by what Protestant denominations teach no matter where in the world you live, and that is that! Peace, Carlan

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Alright, well, Carlan has declared that to be that so this thread is closed!

If you are a member of the Apostolic Catholic Church, you must not go by what Protestant denominations teach no matter where in the world you live, and that is that! Peace, Carlan

 

[Esdra]

If you are a member of the Apostolic Catholic Church, you must not go by what Protestant denominations teach no matter where in the world you live, and that is that! Peace, Carlan

Well, yes, I am (still) a member of an Apostolic faith (Roman Catholicism, Latin Rite)…

Nevertheless I read what I want. And believe what I want.

I have been a heretic for such a long time now, you know.

And actually, I can easilier believe in the “Catechisms” of the Presbyterians (or Baptists, though they don’t have that in such an extant than the Presb.) than the CCC.

Esdra

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I’m totally confused by this, Esdra. You are Roman Catholic and yet you choose to believe what you want and follow catechisms of Protestant denoms? I’m totally confused here, brother

Well, yes, I am (still) a member of an Apostolic faith (Roman Catholicism, Latin Rite)…

Nevertheless I read what I want. And believe what I want.

I have been a heretic for such a long time now, you know.

And actually, I can easilier believe in the “Catechisms” of the Presbyterians (or Baptists, though they don’t have that in such an extant than the Presb.) than the CCC.

Esdra