Why don't Catholics have Open Communion?

[1beleevr]

**
gurneyhalleck1,**

The point of **my ** post was to highlight how absolutely outrageous, ridiculous, and mean-spiritied **this **post was.

I am not sure what good is accomplished by allowing 1beleevr to slander and disrespect Catholics right, left , and center on a Catholic board, whose purpose I would have thought is to be an apostolate. Protestants, atheists, and fallen-away Catholics come here searching for the truth, and it is obscured when Catholics allow **1beleevr **to spout lies and sow doubt. Just because he throws in a smiley face now and then, doesn’t mean that what he’s doing isn’t insidious.

My post was not designed to bash catholics as a whole, but point out that we as Christians cannot judge a whole denomination or religion based on a few that we meet! There are many on this forum, who unabashedly demean and belittle noncatholics, and very few catholics come to the defense of those being ridiculed, because they are noncatholic. Personally I do not care what people say about me, or my beliefs, because my worth is not in man, but in God! We all know someone who is a Christian, but have fallen away, or are living a life that is less than desirable! So, don’t get on your high horse flinging insults and barbs, unless you yourself live a righteous life. I myself, do not, but can say, that I serve a B-I-G God, who loves and forgives me(not that I sin intentionally because of grace). I have found out throught the years that Christians really need a sense of humor and thick skin, because the enemy works through others to get to us! Don’t take it personally, grace; I wasn’t talking about you! It’s just that I know what the catholic position is on marriage, then work with and fellowship with catholics who HAVE fathered or had children with someone other than their spouse! For the most part, I have been rather charitable to catholics! Can’t say the same for them in return!

 

[1beleevr]

1beleevr…

You came across to me that you had already prejudged as well as place my faith in Christ beneath yours…

Baptism incorporates us into the Body of Christ…but the Eucharist is a sacrament, and the physical presence of God among us…one is not to receive unworthily — without faith and proper disposition.

How I personally relate to Christ is for Christ, not for you.

That was not the intended purpose!

 

[PRmerger]

Then what of annulments?

Annulment (actually, a “declaration of nullity”) means that no marriage ever existed.

If it was a marriage *it cannot be annulled. *

 

[ajatkinson]

Gurney is right. Dogma is essentially codified theology. Those things outside of it on which theologoumena (speculation) is possible are still subject to discussion within the bounds of what is dogmatically possible. In the non-Uniate East, no one is bound to endorse any particular method or process by which the bread and wine become the Blood and Body (“transubstantiation” is not a dogma, but a private theological opinion/speculation), but all are bound to believe (dogma) that the bread and wine do in fact undergo such a change. Disbelieve it and you are anathematized (as well you should be!).

There is a perception in the Protestant world, developed in reaction to what is seen as Roman Catholic legalism, that things like dogma and tradition are somehow opposed to the “true” Christian religion, rather than the illumination of it. I can’t say I necessarily blame the average Protestant on the street, given their background, but still…what a travesty!

I’ll

just

leave

these

here

“Codified-Theology” eh? Sounds cryptic. Here’s my definition. Theology = the study of God and his nature (unifying). Dogma = The rules a group makes up based on their interpretation of scripture and their personal beliefs (divisive). It is not Theology that separates Christians.

No believer in True Presence doubts that the elements of Eucharist “undergoes a change”. When the wine/grape juice is bought at the Grocery store or wherever it comes from, its obviously not yet the blood of Christ. But at the Lord’s Table, it is. I don’t have to be Catholic to believe it undergoes a change, non-Catholics that believe in Real Presence just don’t put so much effort into explaining exactly when it changes and how. Certianly the scriptures don’t tell us how it happens.

 

[ajatkinson]

I’m in a hurry and have to split here but I will say that you are drawing a false dichotomy saying that theology and dogma are mutually-exclusive and what is an Anglo-Methodist? That’s a new one for yours truly!

It was something I made up haha. I changed it to what it is currently though, as I knew this would cause confusion. I was trying to convey the liturgical type of Methodist Church I belong to v.s. more Charismatic ones.

 

[ajatkinson]

The following is why Catholics do not have open communion and it has been said many time before and in other threads.

The communion that comes with receiving the Eucharist requires commitment. The priest presents the host to us and says “Body of Christ.” Anyone receiving must say “Amen.”

This brief exchange holds great significance. For if we consent to the statement that the host is the real Body of Christ, we also consent to the belief that the priest has the power to confect the sacrament. And if the priest has the power to confect the sacrament, then the Church had the authority to consecrate that man as a priest of Christ.
And if the Church had that power to do such a thing, then it also has the authority given by God to teach what is true.
The Eucharist is the source and summit of our faith and is not undertaken lightly.
For that reason, I would not want to counsel my separated brethern to partake of the sacrament under false pretenses. If he says “Amen” when presented with the host while not truly believing all that this consent implies, then he or she is committing a sacrilege - or at the very least a gross irreverence.

What the Church is doing by not having an open communion is acknowledging the truth of the protestant reformation. It is the early reformists who walked away from the table in protest when they denied the Church.
What the Catholic Church is doing honors that protest and preserves the faithful Protestant from harming themselves spiritually, and creating a grave scandal for others.
If a reformer wants to come to a Catholic mass and receive the Eucharist, one has to ask why? If he truly thinks it a meaningful thing, then he should be be Catholic.
Peace to all, Carlan

**
I would gladly sit in Mass and I would proudly respond with “Amen” signifying my affirmation that indeed your priest and church IS in fact given the authority to do such things**.

“If a reformer wants to come to a Catholic mass and receive the Eucharist, one has to ask why? If he truly thinks it a meaningful thing, then he should be be Catholic.”

It seems you missed my point! My willingness to participate in your Mass has nothing to do with my willingness to join the RCC, it is a willingness to fellowship with other believers in the most sacred of sacraments, which from what I have gathered over the years cannot be seen in most people. So then, if I am willing to say “Amen” and acknowledge your Church and Priest’s authority, why don’t I come to morning Mass and receive the sacrament sometime, just as I sign of worship, fully acknowledging the authority of your church and its leaders?

The answer: because someone would likely panic and say "Well wait a minute now! One cannot simply say “Amen” and say “yes you are given the authority by God”, but you should acknowledge we are the ONLY ones given proper authority by God, and when you do this, you certainly would want to convert to Catholicism!"

Am I likely correct in this assumption? The point of all this is to say this: many Protestants like myself sympathize with most of the teachings of the RCC and are willing to fellowship with others in Mass from time to time and share the Eucharist, but we are forbidden to do so and it cannot be said that it is because we lack respect for the authority of the priests, the church itself, or any other aspect of the Church. **Because I occasionally take communion with Baptists does not signify I am a Baptist myself or the I believe %100 of Baptist doctrine, but rather it symbolizes that I am a Methodist who acknowledges his Baptist bretheren are part of the body of Christ (the True Church), and who wants to share the sacrament of communion with them. **

The Catechism recognizes there are Christians who are not members of the RCC. They do go to assemblies and gather together in the name of Christ. As Matthew 18:20 says “where two or more are gathered in my name, there I am also” we see that in fact they are part of the body of Christ (the universal Church). Certainly the leaders in these other fellowships which are part of the body of Christ have also been given authority by God. People like myself just want to be permitted to fellowship in Eucharist with Catholics shall we ever feel led by the Spirit to do so, that’s all friend.

 

[Reuben_J]

**
I would gladly sit in Mass and I would proudly respond with “Amen” signifying my affirmation that indeed your priest and church IS in fact given the authority to do such things**. It seems you missed my point! My willingness to participate in your Mass has nothing to do with my willingness to join the RCC, it is a willingness to fellowship with other believers in the most sacred of sacraments, which from what I have gathered over the years cannot be seen in most people. So then, if I am willing to say “Amen” and acknowledge your Church and Priest’s authority, why don’t I come to morning Mass and receive the sacrament sometime, just as I sign of worship, fully acknowledging the authority of your church and its leaders?

The answer: because someone would likely panic and say "Well wait a minute now! One cannot simply say “Amen” and say “yes you are given the authority by God”, but you should acknowledge we are the ONLY ones given proper authority by God, and when you do this, you certainly would want to convert to Catholicism!"

Am I likely correct in this assumption?

No, you are not correct. The Amen that you profess has got to do with accepting the Magestrium of the Catholic Church. You don’t have to join the Latin Rite (RCC you call it) but you can join any of the 23 or so Rites that are in communion with the Bishop of Rome because these believe in the same Magestrium. You see, the Amen you profess is not according to your interpretation for it to be valid in you receiving the most Holy Communion but according to the interpretation of the Catholic Church. Other than that you are merely deceiving yourself and you are not sincere in wanting to receive the Catholic Church most Holy Eucharist.

**
The point of all this is to say this: many Protestants like myself sympathize with most of the teachings of the RCC and are willing to fellowship with others in Mass from time to time and share the Eucharist, but we are forbidden to do so and it cannot be said that it is because we lack respect for the authority of the priests, the church itself, or any other aspect of the Church. **Because I occasionally take communion with Baptists does not signify I am a Baptist myself or the I believe %100 of Baptist doctrine, but rather it symbolizes that I am a Methodist who acknowledges his Baptist bretheren are part of the body of Christ (the True Church), and who wants to share the sacrament of communion with them. ****

The Catechism recognizes there are Christians who are not members of the RCC. They do go to assemblies and gather together in the name of Christ. As Matthew 18:20 says “where two or more are gathered in my name, there I am also” we see that in fact they are part of the body of Christ (the universal Church). Certainly the leaders in these other fellowships which are part of the body of Christ have also been given authority by God. People like myself just want to be permitted to fellowship in Eucharist with Catholics shall we ever feel led by the Spirit to do so, that’s all friend.

I sympathize with your sympathy with the Catholic position but merely sympathy will not entitle to make you right according the teaching of the Church. Yes, you are a valid Christian and we have much in common but that commonness does not include what can really make us in communion in faith. We have to accept it, our faith belief is not entirely the same for us to be in communion with each other.

God bless.

 

[Reuben_J]

As Christians we can relate to each other as brothers and sisters in Jesus in our worship of the Triune God. We can stand in solidarity with each other in this belief and we can also support each other even in faith. However because of our differences as how we perceive this faith we are not able to proclaim it truly the same from the table of faith and therefore unable to communion with each other.

Communion is being one with each other in faith and in belief. The Lord has even gone further in defining this communion, that is, the communion with him in his real body and blood, that we could be really one with him in flesh – heart, mind and soul.

Thus the Holy Communion is partaken only with those who share the same entire faith and not just selective few while in the rest we differ. Tradition has it that in the olden days, a celebrant (the Pope) of the mass in Rome would break the bread and that portion would be packed in clean clothe to be couriered by horses to nearby parishes to be shared with his fellow priests and their congregation so that they were in communion with each other.

Today during the mass, the bread is broken and a small piece is symbolically dropped into the chalice and will be consumed by the celebrant as there is no necessity to send it anymore to the other priests as they are already in communion with the Bishop of Rome by virtue of their ordination in fidelity to Rome in the profession of their faith.

That is why we cannot communion with other Christians who do not share the entire faith and belief because this communion also means to acknowledge the proclaiming of this same faith and belief. It therefore does nobody any good to receive the Holy Communion if we are not actually one in belief and in faith.

 

[rinnie]

“Codified-Theology” eh? Sounds cryptic. Here’s my definition. Theology = the study of God and his nature (unifying). Dogma = The rules a group makes up based on their interpretation of scripture and their personal beliefs (divisive). It is not Theology that separates Christians.

No believer in True Presence doubts that the elements of Eucharist “undergoes a change”. When the wine/grape juice is bought at the Grocery store or wherever it comes from, its obviously not yet the blood of Christ. But at the Lord’s Table, it is. I don’t have to be Catholic to believe it undergoes a change, non-Catholics that believe in Real Presence just don’t put so much effort into explaining exactly when it changes and how. Certianly the scriptures don’t tell us how it happens.

Certainly they do. 1 Cor. This is the cup of the new covenant SEALED With MY BLOOD.

This means that every time you eat and drink this cup you proclaim the Lords death until he comes. It follows that if anyone eats and drinks from this cup in a way that dishonors him he is guily of sin against the Lords body and blood.

Now tell me WHY does non-catholics not put forth much effort in EXPLAINING exactly when it changes and how. ANd how can any Priest be comdemned for doing so to such an extreme so that we may not concemn ourself before our Lord. Why is this teaching not taught in Protestant Church’s???

You might want to read the scriptures once again and they will tell you quite clear what the RCC teaches and why. THen maybe you can respond back to me and tell me why this is not very important to you?

ANd please let it be known that the Eucharist is the CENTER of the Catholic Church because the EUCHARIST is the LIVING CHRIST that we receive and CANNOT receive un-worthy and cannot be in a state of Sin. I am very unhappy and disturbed that this is not a teaching of the protestant faith.

 

[rinnie]

“Codified-Theology” eh? Sounds cryptic. Here’s my definition. Theology = the study of God and his nature (unifying). Dogma = The rules a group makes up based on their interpretation of scripture and their personal beliefs (divisive). It is not Theology that separates Christians.

No believer in True Presence doubts that the elements of Eucharist “undergoes a change”. When the wine/grape juice is bought at the Grocery store or wherever it comes from, its obviously not yet the blood of Christ. But at the Lord’s Table, it is. I don’t have to be Catholic to believe it undergoes a change, non-Catholics that believe in Real Presence just don’t put so much effort into explaining exactly when it changes and how. Certianly the scriptures don’t tell us how it happens.

This is not only a false statement about the RCC but a dishonor to our Lord. Jesus said to his Apostles I will give you the words. That is how dogma of the faith is understood. Those words are given to our Father’s of the Church straight from the Holy Spirit the way God promised us. Are you saying Jesus led to us when he made that promise to us.

Jesus said I will be sending to you the ADVOCATE the HOLY SPIRIT to lead you in the faith. The Holy Spirit is not a group of people who interpret’s scripture on personal belief. Dogma of the faith is from the Holy Spirit the way Jesus promised.

 

[ajatkinson]

Certainly they do. 1 Cor. This is the cup of the new covenant SEALED With MY BLOOD.

This means that every time you eat and drink this cup you proclaim the Lords death until he comes. It follows that if anyone eats and drinks from this cup in a way that dishonors him he is guily of sin against the Lords body and blood.

Now tell me WHY does non-catholics not put forth much effort in EXPLAINING exactly when it changes and how. ANd how can any Priest be comdemned for doing so to such an extreme so that we may not concemn ourself before our Lord. Why is this teaching not taught in Protestant Church’s???

You might want to read the scriptures once again and they will tell you quite clear what the RCC teaches and why. THen maybe you can respond back to me and tell me why this is not very important to you?

ANd please let it be known that the Eucharist is the CENTER of the Catholic Church because the EUCHARIST is the LIVING CHRIST that we receive and CANNOT receive un-worthy and cannot be in a state of Sin. I am very unhappy and disturbed that this is not a teaching of the protestant faith.

First off, “This is the cup of the new covenant SEALED With MY BLOOD.” tells NOTHING about what exact point in the mass the elements become the body and blood: is it when they are taken out of the tabernacle or after the priest says a specific sentence, etc?

And they don’t feel the need to explain at what point it does because it is a holy mystery of God. You believe the trinity is a Holy Mystery right? Why can’t the Real Presence?

 

[ajatkinson]

No, you are not correct. The Amen that you profess has got to do with accepting the Magestrium of the Catholic Church. You don’t have to join the Latin Rite (RCC you call it) but you can join any of the 23 or so Rites that are in communion with the Bishop of Rome because these believe in the same Magestrium. You see, the Amen you profess is not according to your interpretation for it to be valid in you receiving the most Holy Communion but according to the interpretation of the Catholic Church. Other than that you are merely deceiving yourself and you are not sincere in wanting to receive the Catholic Church most Holy Eucharist.

I sympathize with your sympathy with the Catholic position but merely sympathy will not entitle to make you right according the teaching of the Church. Yes, you are a valid Christian and we have much in common but that commonness does not include what can really make us in communion in faith. We have to accept it, our faith belief is not entirely the same for us to be in communion with each other.

God bless.

Like I said, I knew it wasn’t that simple.I knew someone would give me some profound elaborate answer. Here’s the deal. You say it has nothing to with with claiming the churches who are under the Holy See are the only ones given proper authority by God, yet you speak of submitting to the Magestrium of the Catholic Church/Bishop of Rome. Is this not what they teach? That they are the only ones qualified to serve The Lord’s Supper/Consecrate the Host/celebrate a mass?

 

[ajatkinson]

As Christians we can relate to each other as brothers and sisters in Jesus in our worship of the Triune God. We can stand in solidarity with each other in this belief and we can also support each other even in faith. However because of our differences as how we perceive this faith we are not able to proclaim it truly the same from the table of faith and therefore unable to communion with each other.

Communion is being one with each other in faith and in belief. The Lord has even gone further in defining this communion, that is, the communion with him in his real body and blood, that we could be really one with him in flesh – heart, mind and soul.

Thus the Holy Communion is partaken only with those who share the same entire faith and not just selective few while in the rest we differ. Tradition has it that in the olden days, a celebrant (the Pope) of the mass in Rome would break the bread and that portion would be packed in clean clothe to be couriered by horses to nearby parishes to be shared with his fellow priests and their congregation so that they were in communion with each other.

Today during the mass, the bread is broken and a small piece is symbolically dropped into the chalice and will be consumed by the celebrant as there is no necessity to send it anymore to the other priests as they are already in communion with the Bishop of Rome by virtue of their ordination in fidelity to Rome in the profession of their faith.

That is why we cannot communion with other Christians who do not share the entire faith and belief because this communion also means to acknowledge the proclaiming of this same faith and belief. It therefore does nobody any good to receive the Holy Communion if we are not actually one in belief and in faith.

Well you don’t have to be in “Communion” with them, but why refuse them the Eucharist if they believe in the authority of your church, submit to the Catholic teaching of Eucharist, etc?

 

[ajatkinson]

I have to disagree with you. I think LCMS is just as strict if not stricter regarding it’s communion practices. I, as an ELCA Lutheran, can not go to an LCMS church and commune. I could go ahead of time and have a chat with the pastor at the church I planned on attending and he could certainly admit me or not. Even my own ability of proving myself a Lutheran by reciting the Small Catechism verbatum in it’s original German, would not guarantee me a spot at the communion rail.

Yeah but that’s because your denomination ordains homosexual clergy lol. I as a Methodist believing in True Presence can take communion with Lutherans. Thankfully this is the case as I find it an honor to worship with other groups.

 

[vsedriver]

W-R-O-N-G! Cite scriptural proof, please! How could a pope deny knowing his Master?

how could an Apostle betray his Master?

could the answer be… they were human?

 

[vsedriver]

I am a convert from Catholicism to a Baptist Church. But I haven’t resigned officially from the Roman Catholic Church.
So in fact “officially” I am a Catholic (according to the paper), but inofficially I am a Baptist (in my heart! )

Everything clear now?

Esdra

I believe there is no such thing as an ‘official’ resignation from the Catholic Church. The Church would simply consider you a lapsed Catholic. Welcome home at any time.

 

[Esdra]

I believe there is no such thing as an ‘official’ resignation from the Catholic Church. The Church would simply consider you a lapsed Catholic. Welcome home at any time.

I was referring to the State:
In Austria you secularly have to resign from the Roman Catholic Church (as it is recognized by the State; The Baptists i.e. are NOT recognized by the state!) in the county-government.
Because if you don’t, you are still “Roman Catholic” on the paper.

This is very different than in the US, you know? Austria and Germany are known for their bureaucracy, aren’t they?
Well, different countries, different customs, right?

And as this “secular resignation” doesn’t exist in the English speaking world, it’s hard to describe for me. I guess many others here in CAF don’t know if I am a Catholic now, or not!

 

[Carlan]

Like I said, I knew it wasn’t that simple.I knew someone would give me some profound elaborate answer. Here’s the deal. You say it has nothing to with with claiming the churches who are under the Holy See are the only ones given proper authority by God, yet you speak of submitting to the Magestrium of the Catholic Church/Bishop of Rome. Is this not what they teach? That they are the only ones qualified to serve The Lord’s Supper/Consecrate the Host/celebrate a mass?

AJ, Perhaps It would be a good suggestion for you to study all of this through the teaching of the Catholic Magisterim and ask with an open minded attitude drawing on the help of the Holy Spirit for a Catholic understanding, instead of your own thoughts and understanding about the Truth.
Yes, we do believe that God the Father gives the power to our ordained Priest to confect and bring about the efficacy of the Sacrament of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord and God,The Eucharist.
Peace Carlan.

 

[vsedriver]

I was referring to the State:
In Austria you secularly have to resign from the Roman Catholic Church (as it is recognized by the State; The Baptists i.e. are NOT recognized by the state!) in the county-government.
Because if you don’t, you are still “Roman Catholic” on the paper.

This is very different than in the US, you know? Austria and Germany are known for their bureaucracy, aren’t they?
Well, different countries, different customs, right?

And as this “secular resignation” doesn’t exist in the English speaking world, it’s hard to describe for me. I guess many others here in CAF don’t know if I am a Catholic now, or not!

so you are a ‘civil’ Catholic? I never knew that about those European countries.

yes, in the USA religious affiliations don’t appear on government forms.

 

[Esdra]

so you are a ‘civil’ Catholic? I never knew that about those European countries.

yes, in the USA religious affiliations don’t appear on government forms.

I don’t know what you mean with “civil Catholic”, sorry.

Yes, in Austria religious affiliations appear on government forms. (i.e. also on Reports in schools)

Please refer to this post.