I want communion!!!! (Jesus Christ, ritual, blood, churches, scriptures)

[Mister Emu]

For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

Just to note, no one is going to physically stop you from receiving communion.

[SoyLeche]

Originally Posted by Arrow

Dude, who gave the pope the authority to deny something Jesus established for all believers? According to what you have said, communion is now Catholic not Christian, and what other Christians practice is communion to a lesser extent. I fail to see the connection because there is no connection to be made.

If you don't think that the Pope has authority to deny you communion - why do you want a Catholic communion in the first place? Many, if not most, Protestant churches offere a communion. Go get it there.

[rheff78]

Originally Posted by Arrow

Dude, who gave the pope the authority to deny something Jesus established for all believers? According to what you have said, communion is now Catholic not Christian, and what other Christians practice is communion to a lesser extent. I fail to see the connection because there is no connection to be made.

Well, if you want to get into that. Jesus gave him the power. Apostolic succession. Anyway, I never said communion is just Catholic, OUR communion is for Catholics. I have no knowledge of how or what the other Christian religions give communion. I only know what we believe. Why do you want communion with us anyway? Like SoyLeche said, there are many other churches that offer coummnion.

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by rheff78

Well, if you want to get into that. Jesus gave him the power. Apostolic succession. Anyway, I never said communion is just Catholic, OUR communion is for Catholics. I have no knowledge of how or what the other Christian religions give communion. I only know what we believe. Why do you want communion with us anyway? Like SoyLeche said, there are many other churches that offer coummnion.

A couple of points, with a bit of a disclaimer at the beginning:
First of all, I'm not a "catholic-basher." The following comments are not a judgment -- just observations.

1) I seem to remember a debate concerning the efficacy of the Communion if it was consecrated by an unworthy priest. I think the conclusion that was reached was that a human priest, acting unworthily, could not nullify the efficacy of the Communion.

I wonder why that doesn't seem to work the other way, too, that is, why does a communicant's "unworthiness" affect the efficacy of Communion, but a priest's does not?

2) I was not aware that Communion was in any way "yours," "mine," or "ours." I thought the Table belonged to Christ, and he issues the invitation.

[Scott1]

Originally Posted by Arrow

Dude, who gave the pope the authority to deny something Jesus established for all believers? According to what you have said, communion is now Catholic not Christian, and what other Christians practice is communion to a lesser extent. I fail to see the connection because there is no connection to be made.

To be clear... this is the rule of both the RCC and Orthodox faiths.... and it's not just the Pope who has denied you, it is ALL of us who are in communion with the Church.

You are welcome to become Catholic if you'd like to participate in Communion, but NO ONE has a right to receive it... I believe it is a honor that took me a year of prayer and study (I'm a convert) to earn.

Remember the teaching from 1 Cor. 11:27-29 - in these verses, Paul says that eating or drinking in an unworthy manner is the equivalent of profaning (literally, murdering) the body and blood of the Lord. If this is just a symbol, we cannot be guilty of actually profaning (murdering) it. We cannot murder a symbol. Either Paul, the divinely inspired apostle of God, is imposing an unjust penalty, or the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ.... and if you don't believe that, you will damage your soul by partaking in Communion... and we won't let that happen.

This has been the foundation of the Christian faith since the begining:
"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Smyrnaeans, 7,1 (c. A.D. 110).

"For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (c. A.D. 110-165).

[rheff78]

Originally Posted by sojourner

A couple of points, with a bit of a disclaimer at the beginning:
First of all, I'm not a "catholic-basher." The following comments are not a judgment -- just observations.

1) I seem to remember a debate concerning the efficacy of the Communion if it was consecrated by an unworthy priest. I think the conclusion that was reached was that a human priest, acting unworthily, could not nullify the efficacy of the Communion.

I wonder why that doesn't seem to work the other way, too, that is, why does a communicant's "unworthiness" affect the efficacy of Communion, but a priest's does not?

2) I was not aware that Communion was in any way "yours," "mine," or "ours." I thought the Table belonged to Christ, and he issues the invitation.

See Scott's post, he got to it before me.

[Dunemeister]

Originally Posted by rheff78

Well, if you want to get into that. Jesus gave him the power. Apostolic succession. Anyway, I never said communion is just Catholic, OUR communion is for Catholics. I have no knowledge of how or what the other Christian religions give communion. I only know what we believe. Why do you want communion with us anyway? Like SoyLeche said, there are many other churches that offer coummnion.

An exclusive communion is a primary barrier to reconciliation in the divided church. By not permitting others of different denominations to participate at the communion table, the RCC in effect denies their status as Christians. Besides, as an Anglican, I view the Roman Catholic Church as my mother church, and I would like to be able to enjoy full communion with her.

The point was originally raised for me by a situation that arose between me and a RC friend of mine when we visited each other's churches. The service at my Anglican church was almost indistinguishable from a Roman Catholic mass (I go to what's called an Anglocatholic church), and at the time for communion, my friend asked, "should I take communion here?" I asked "are you baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost"? He said "Yes." So I said, "Well then, there's your answer." And so he partook with the rest of us. When I went with him to his church, I asked the same question, and he got very flustered and embarrassed, saying "I'm sorry, you really shouldn't." I was extremely offended at the time, and I almost walked out.

Denying communion to someone who has been baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost is utterly contrary to Christian love. Taking communion unworthily is not a matter of whether a person holds to a strange metaphysical theory or not. It's an ethical issue. 1 Corinthians chastises a church for allowing communion to become a place where social status and wealth become apparent, whereas it should be a equalizing event that obscures and eliminates social divisions. Yet somehow, the RCC (and perhaps the Orthodox, too, although I haven't had any dealings with them) has managed to make it a key element in (further) dividing the Christian community.

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by Dunemeister

An exclusive communion is a primary barrier to reconciliation in the divided church. By not permitting others of different denominations to participate at the communion table, the RCC in effect denies their status as Christians. Besides, as an Anglican, I view the Roman Catholic Church as my mother church, and I would like to be able to enjoy full communion with her.

The point was originally raised for me by a situation that arose between me and a RC friend of mine when we visited each other's churches. The service at my Anglican church was almost indistinguishable from a Roman Catholic mass (I go to what's called an Anglocatholic church), and at the time for communion, my friend asked, "should I take communion here?" I asked "are you baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost"? He said "Yes." So I said, "Well then, there's your answer." And so he partook with the rest of us. When I went with him to his church, I asked the same question, and he got very flustered and embarrassed, saying "I'm sorry, you really shouldn't." I was extremely offended at the time, and I almost walked out.

Denying communion to someone who has been baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost is utterly contrary to Christian love. Taking communion unworthily is not a matter of whether a person holds to a strange metaphysical theory or not. It's an ethical issue. 1 Corinthians chastises a church for allowing communion to become a place where social status and wealth become apparent, whereas it should be a equalizing event that obscures and eliminates social divisions. Yet somehow, the RCC (and perhaps the Orthodox, too, although I haven't had any dealings with them) has managed to make it a key element in (further) dividing the Christian community.

You know, it's funny. On several occasions of serious ecumenical effort, when everything had been agreed upon, and consensus has finally seemed possible, when it came time to share the Meal, the impending concordat was shattered. it's funny that the Body of Christ is the one insturment we use to hack, instead of to heal. To me, that's a greater desecration of the Body of Christ (which is the community of followrs) than opening the Table. Even Jesus ate with sinners and prostitutes...