R
Randy_Carson
Guest
It is sad that the body of Christ is wounded by the division created by the Reformation.
However, it is wrong for someone to receive “communion” when he or she is not in communion with the Church.
- Status
However, it is wrong for someone to receive “communion” when he or she is not in communion with the Church.
S
SyCarl
Guest
I respect the Catholic position. My in-laws are Catholic and we attend Mass with them when we visit. They have told me I should take comminion with them but I haven’t since it would not be proper to disrespect the Catholic Church’s position. Many Protestant Churches have closed communion as well.
The church I attend, the Presbyterian Church in Canada does have an open communion. We believe that it is Christ’s table, not ours so all believers should be welcome.
The church I attend, the Presbyterian Church in Canada does have an open communion. We believe that it is Christ’s table, not ours so all believers should be welcome.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
You have to inform your in laws that Canon Law doesn’t allow Holy Communion with Non Catholic Christians. If they have other Protestant friends, they may be take the Blessed Host out of misinformation.
K
kmcgonigle
Guest
SyCarl;
Most non-catholic churches don’t believe in the Real Presence, therefore they do have open tables. If its just a symbol, then why not? Catholics, however, have a closed communion for the safety of non-believers in the Real Presence.
Peace in Christ,
Kevin
Most non-catholic churches don’t believe in the Real Presence, therefore they do have open tables. If its just a symbol, then why not? Catholics, however, have a closed communion for the safety of non-believers in the Real Presence.
Peace in Christ,
Kevin
A
AveVerumCorpus
Guest
This has been such an interesting and divisive topic for such a long time! I am now a parishoner at a Anglo-Catholic (Anglican/Episcopalian) parish in Los Angeles. In the Anglican Communion, all baptized Christians are invited to the altar rail because there is a different understanding of the nature of communion. In the Anglican Communion, receiving Holy Communion at mass is a sign of our continued communion with one another, regardless of our divisions; it is seen as a commitment to be united with each other and with Christ through the Sacrament of His Body and Blood.
And yes, for the record, we do believe in the transubstantiated presence of Our Lord, which is why we reserve the consecrated species in the tabernacle on our ad orientem altar.
I do not, however, receieve Communion when I am attending the TLM at a Roman Catholic parish because of the obvious reason that I am not in complete communion with the See of Rome.
And yes, for the record, we do believe in the transubstantiated presence of Our Lord, which is why we reserve the consecrated species in the tabernacle on our ad orientem altar.
I do not, however, receieve Communion when I am attending the TLM at a Roman Catholic parish because of the obvious reason that I am not in complete communion with the See of Rome.
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
Well heck, Manny, it seems that you can be Orthodox and have doctrines at variance with Rome, and still receive the Eucharist in a Catholic Church (although the Orthodox prohibit their folks from doing so, I believe). Where’s the logic in that?
Sounds like we like to keep Jesus in a box. Ridiculous.
Adultery? I would think that you would not want to withhold the Body and Blood of Christ from anyone who repents and believes the Gospel. If I withheld such from a fellow Christian, I would fear for my very soul.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
you have mistated the actual situation. The Catholic Church teaches and has consistently for 2000 years that the Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. The Protestants, in that historical event called the Reformation, built their theology on denial of that fundamental doctrine. They therefore removed themselves willfully from full communion with they Church. That is why they may not receive communion, because they deny the very unity of which this sacrament is a sacred sign, the very unity Christ pleaded for on the night before he died. Any Protestant may received communion by simply returning to full communion with the Church, and restoring that rupture, and reconciling the damage caused by that rupture. The process by which the Church welcomes them home is called RCIA. Call your nearest CAtholic parish to inquire.
My son a few years ago stomped out of the house during a family holiday meal, because he disagrees with core beliefs of this family. He maintains and persists in that bitter disagreement to this day, and refuses to participate in any family celebrations that hinge on those core beliefs (anything that resembles a religious holiday like Christmas). He can reconcile at any time, and if he shows up at the door he will be welcome. He can sit down at the table. But he has to take the first step, he has to reconcile, apologies and forgiveness has to happen on both sides. As long as he persists in his refusal to be in union with the family, he separates himself by his own choice. We have not banished him. He can’t join the meal because he won’t join the meal, he rejects the reason for the meal, the occasion for the meal, and the meaning of the meal.
M
MrS
Guest
Thus our referral to our separated brethren as just that… separated. Not banned, not condemned (as are the many erroneous parts of theology of their faith communities).
But the father of the household I would think will pray that all will be one…
In the case of the Catholic Church it is His one… not the one of those who post that they have the real presence.
“… I will build My Church…”
what part of
I = Jesus Himself, not a reformer
My = His church, not a man-made (or woman) design
Church = singular, one, not two or more, not a faith community
do they not understand??
.
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
That was not the reason for the Reformation. Read the Marburg Colloquy - in which Luther defended the Real Presence of Christ.
Try again.
M
MrS
Guest
Perhaps what is more clear is this: the core “doctrines”, the “solas” on which the Reformation stands or falls also resulted in the loss of much of what Jesus gave us… greatest of which is Himself in the Real Presence.
No priest, no Eucharist.
No Eucharist, no Church.
M
MrS
Guest
Perhaps what is more clear is this: the core “doctrines”, the “solas” on which the Reformation stands or falls also resulted in the loss of much of what Jesus gave us… greatest of which is Himself in the Real Presence.
No priest, no Eucharist.
No Eucharist, no Church.
M
mercygate
Guest
What is your denomination? That information will help us address your specific questions. The fact that you think Catholic teaching “does not square with Scrpture” shows us that you have never examined the scriptural foundation of Catholic teaching.
If your denomination believes that the Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, how do you believe it gets to BE that?
When did your denomination begin having open Communion? This was certainly not a practice of any of the mainstream Reformation Churches until the 20th Century.
G
Grateful4mercy
Guest
But Pastor, are you saying that you accept whatever beliefs the believer brings with them? We are willing and wish to commune with the entire world, but we can hardly have them bringing heresy into the church. Please note, I’m not saying you are heretical, but there are some ancient heresy’s that are finding new homes amongst some non-denominational churches.
BTW, we’ll have to get together sometime and have a Ride for Jesus or something
R
ronnok20
Guest
Thank you for making that statement. I’m glad someone did.
S
SyCarl
Guest
Our church believes in a real presence in communion, although not in the same way that the Catholic Church. We believe that the presence is a mystery. It may be by transubstantion or consubtantiation or whatever other way Jesus intended. There is nothing in Scripture that says a priest is the only one who can consecrate communion so we believe our communion is completely valid.
R
ronnok20
Guest
In response to this: I am Episcopalian in compliance with the Anglican Communion worldwide. Does any man have power to make Jesus body and blood with bread and wine or is it truly God who does it? Read the scriptures. Jesus said where two or more are gathered in my name, there will I be. That is how it gets to BE that.
M
MrS
Guest
Please go back to verse 15 and re-read. The whole context of that passage reveals another Catholic Truth… that the Church (and obviously it is the only one founded by Jesus since scripture is His wWord) is the finally authority… not the one witness, not the two witnesses, not a group of witnesses… but the Church.
K
kage_ar
Guest
M
MrS
Guest
The Catholic Church recognizes:
[1] The Sole Highpriest is Jesus Christ
[2] We are all part of the priesthood of believers, sinners that we are.
[3] There is a separate ministerial priesthood. The discription of the early Church in ACTS can only describe the Catholic Church.
I know we agree on the first two. If you have doubts on the third, the ministerial priesthood (or doubt that it exists only in God’s format, not man’s),
I then refer to both NUMBERS account of the wrath of Koran… where those who assumed the duties of the ministerial priesthood, and those who followed them, where all slain.
and
Then the reference in Jude to the early Church laity to beware lest they too incur the wrath of Koran. (Why warn them against something if that something did not exist??)
Jesus did not say “… as often as you…” to all his disciples. Only the eleven. And only they were empowered to “lay on hands” and confere on selected disciples the sacramental powers they held. Even Judas’ replacement had to be qualified - and only two were, so they cast lots)
St Paul also warned the church members (not the outsiders) to receive the Holy Eucharist ONLY if recognizing It as the true Body and Blood of the Saviour.
The laity received the Eucharist… only the ordained, ministerial priesthood confected It, or gave It to us.
The precursor to this gift is shown in the feeding of the 5000. Only the Apostles distributed the meal. And when they ran out, they returned to the Lord for more.
No mention of the hungry doing it on their own.
The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist exists ONLY in the Catholic Mass… and because of Catholic Consecration… no matter how much another says, claims, or hopes to partake.
.
M
mercygate
Guest
I don’t know what kind of Anglican you are. I am a graduate of the mother Seminary of the Episcopal Church in the United States: that means I have the education of an Episcopal Priest. Episcopalians believe that they have valid Apostolic Succession and that Apostolic Succession is required in order to have valid Orders, and that valid Orders are required in order to confect the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist. Laymen did not do this; deacons did not do it.
So yes: God does it. But God does it according to his own game plan, which involves Holy Orders. Only Bishops and Priests have the authority and ability to consecrate the Elements. So before you snipe at the Catholic Church grief over closed Communion, maybe you should learn a little of the history of your own denomination.
The Episcopal Church did not admit people of other denominations to the sacrament** until the 1970s**, when limited access was first granted to Lutherans. That has since been expanded.
Oh, one more thing: I would practically choke to death when anybody tried to tell me I was Protestant.
- Status