I want communion!!!!

[Dunemeister]

I'd just like to point out that it wasn't the protestants who left. Luther et al were excommunicated. Until there were threats of excommunication, Luther was happy to work within the established structures. Threats of excommunication convinced Luther that the church was too corrupt to be reformed from within and an alternative was needed. I disagree with Luther about that last point, but the point for our purposes is just to be clear about the history. The church separated itself from Luther and not vice versa. Following that separation, both sides said some very unfortunate things about the other which has made the division more or less permanent. Now, both sides must make efforts toward reconciliation. So far, we've only been talking about one side of the debate -- the RCC should open the table to all professing Christian groups. At least, they should start with those that are most similar: Orthodox (perhaps this is already possible), Lutheran, Anglican. After that, work with the evangelical churches. This process will involve give and take from all sides, so the RCC can't simply say "we'll stay unreformed and unmoved, and y'all are just going to have to live with us as we are."

There's a whole other side of what the other branches of Christianity might do, but I suggest another thread to get into that.

 

[rheff78]

I agree Dunemeister. There is a divide and we need to start bridging that gap. I might point out, however, that the divide is not jsut between the RCC and Protestants, there is also great divides in Protestantism itself.

 

[Scott1]

I guess I should start first by saying that I am in favor of open Communion... me.. .Scott Woodill.... speaking for myself alone..... gotta make that clear.

I would no sooner deny Dunemeister, sojurner, or anyone else who came to Mass OXYGEN than I would deny them the Eucharist.

So far, we've only been talking about one side of the debate -- the RCC should open the table to all professing Christian groups. At least, they should start with those that are most similar: Orthodox (perhaps this is already possible), Lutheran, Anglican. After that, work with the evangelical churches. This process will involve give and take from all sides, so the RCC can't simply say "we'll stay unreformed and unmoved, and y'all are just going to have to live with us as we are."

Good points all.... an Orthodox Christian can receive Communion in a RCC church, but they do not (allow us to in their Liturgy).... and there have been great strides towards unity on many fronts. The main problem is that we can only work with large groups like the Anglicans and Lutherans, because there as so few "leaders" that can speak for anything other than their personal congregation... but I am hopeful that many more will be reconciled to the Church. Many of the abuses that caused the Reformation have been "reformed"... and I think many on both sides think that we're close to some form of communion.

 

[sojourner]

I agree Dunemeister. There is a divide and we need to start bridging that gap. I might point out, however, that the divide is not jsut between the RCC and Protestants, there is also great divides in Protestantism itself.

Absolutely. I believe the only suloution is to "agree to disagree" -- that is, let each separate body maintain its own identity and polity, but agree to share fully with each other.

 

[Scott1]

Absolutely. I believe the only suloution is to "agree to disagree" -- that is, let each separate body maintain its own identity and polity, but agree to share fully with each other.

What is the point of maintaining individuality ... but at the same time pretending to be one in Communion?

I would understand if you folks wanted to be allowed to come home to the Church but continue to work for the "reforms" you still desire while taking Communion.... but it really makes no sense to me what the point of Communion is if it has NOTHING to do with community.....??????????

Like I said before... I would advocate open communion... but I suppose I should clarify that. I would want non-Catholics to be able to partake of "our" Eucharist... but I would NEVER allow a Catholic to partake in a service outside of the Church. We don't believe that any of the Protestant groups has a valid Eucharist, so communion in that sense would be impossible. I personally would never take communion at an Anglican liturgy.... it would be an empty lie.... I would sooner die than damn myself in such a way.

You see, the Church has always tought that Communion was about more than ourselves and what it did for us. It is CHRISTOCENTRIC... and not about a false sense of ecumenism to make the community "feel better" about each other. One of the oldest Christian teachings explained this about the Eucharist:
"But every Lord's day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one who is at odds with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: "In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations."
-Didache Ch 14 (emphasis mine)
.... and unless and until you are not at odds with Catholic teaching, you should not partake in Communion with us. To take communion with your Catholic brothers and sisters means that you believe what they believe... and if you don't, well... your conscience SHOULD tell you not to profane the sacrament with a selfish desire for a false unity.
And if that day comes that your are reconciled with the Church, then we will follow the same ancient catechism:
"But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, "Give not that which is holy to the dogs."
Didache Ch 9

I know Church teachings and history pre-Reformation are not that important to those outside the RCC or Orthodox, but you have to understand that it is quite important to us... and we are not (in fact, CAN NOT) going to change that for some false sense of ecumenism.

I do pray that one day soon you will be able to share in the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ sitting side by side with me. :shout

In Christ,
S

 

[sojourner]

This is the kind of mind-set that has hindered efforts at unity and made a mockery of the openness Christ displayed to the "outsider" for far, far too long. You say that it would be OK for us to come to you, and you advocate that position -- it makes you sound so loving and accepting. Then you turn right around and say that what we're doing is invalid. For true acceptance to work, it has to work both ways. We cannot "come 'home' to the Church," because we are already at home as the Church. Jesus said, "Follow me," not "Believe these things about me." Until the RCC is ready to accept all Christians fully --as Christ accepts us fully -- RCC ecumenism will remain largely sham.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Like I said before... I would advocate open communion... but I suppose I should clarify that. I would want non-Catholics to be able to partake of "our" Eucharist... but I would NEVER allow a Catholic to partake in a service outside of the Church. We don't believe that any of the Protestant groups has a valid Eucharist, so communion in that sense would be impossible. I personally would never take communion at an Anglican liturgy.... it would be an empty lie.... I would sooner die than damn myself in such a way.

Why would it damn you to partake of something that both you and the church in question consider to not be the body of Christ? In literal terms, it would be nothing more than a piece of bread to all concerned, wouldn't it?

 

[Scott1]

This is the kind of mind-set that has hindered efforts at unity and made a mockery of the openness Christ displayed to the "outsider" for far, far too long.

You are entitled to your opinion... I can only tell you what I believe... and do it without judgement or claiming that you are making a "mockery" of anything... I can only follow the faith of the Church.

You say that it would be OK for us to come to you, and you advocate that position -- it makes you sound so loving and accepting. Then you turn right around and say that what we're doing is invalid. For true acceptance to work, it has to work both ways.

Truth before unity. No exceptions.

We cannot "come 'home' to the Church," because we are already at home as the Church. Jesus said, "Follow me," not "Believe these things about me." Until the RCC is ready to accept all Christians fully --as Christ accepts us fully -- RCC ecumenism will remain largely sham.

Ecumenism does not mean that we can abandon truth...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why would it damn you to partake of something that both you and the church in question consider to not be the body of Christ? In literal terms, it would be nothing more than a piece of bread to all concerned, wouldn't it?

Yes it would be just bread... and that's the point... to RCC and the Orthodox, Communion is the "source and summit of Christian life"... and to take Communion means you are IN COMMUNION with the community.... and to partake in a false sacrament would be sinful.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes it would be just bread... and that's the point... to RCC and the Orthodox, Communion is the "source and summit of Christian life"... and to take Communion means you are IN COMMUNION with the community....

Okay... but what's wrong with recognizing other Christians, even if not Catholic or Orthodox, as part of that community?

and to partake in a false sacrament would be sinful.

But if neither you nor them are claiming that it's a sacrament at all, how could it be a false one?

 

[Scott1]

Okay... but what's wrong with recognizing other Christians, even if not Catholic or Orthodox, as part of that community?

We do recognize all Christians as part of the Catholic Church.... but Communion is the foundation of our sacramental theology.... some would say the foundation of the Church... so shared Communion without true unity is out of the question.

But if neither you nor them are claiming that it's a sacrament at all, how could it be a false one?

What's the point if it's not a sacrament? I can go to my Church and receive the Body of Christ... why would I want to eat bread? Heck... if that's all we need, slap a burger on it and we'll have "communion" at McDonalds.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

We do recognize all Christians as part of the Catholic Church.... but Communion is the foundation of our sacramental theology.... some would say the foundation of the Church... so shared Communion without true unity is out of the question.

If it isn't an actual, valid Host, then is it actually Communion in the eyes of the Catholic Church?

What's the point if it's not a sacrament? I can go to my Church and receive the Body of Christ... why would I want to eat bread? Heck... if that's all we need, slap a burger on it and we'll have "communion" at McDonalds.

Dunno; I assume that the Protestants get something out of it since they keep on doing it, but in any case, "pointless" and "sinful" aren't the same thing.

 

[Scott1]

If it isn't an actual, valid Host, then is it actually Communion in the eyes of the Catholic Church?

No it is not.... and that's been my point... I would not participate in a service called "communion" and just pretend it's ok because it's only bread and doesn't mean anything.... again, why not just call everything "communion" and we'll share a pack of gum on the subway.

Dunno; I assume that the Protestants get something out of it since they keep on doing it, but in any case, "pointless" and "sinful" aren't the same thing.

It's certainly not pointless to them... I truly believe it's possible for them to receive grace from their "sacrament"... but it would be sinful for me to do something contrary to my conscience.

 

[Scott1]

Just FYI.... I asked my friend JamesThePersian (a member of the Orthodox faith):

What is the possiblity of union with Anglicans and Orthodox?

His answer:

My answer would be 'pigs might fly'. There are certain sections of the Anglican church that are very close to us, though obviously there is no chance of union with a minority like this, but generally we are poles apart. Whoever told you that on the other forum seems to be temporally confused. At the beginning of the last century, quite a number of Anglicans seemed to consider us, rather than Rome, to be the natural fit for Anglicans because of our ecclesiology and things did get quite close in those days. Probably the closest was a joint Anglican/Orthodox council in Bucharest in the '30s. Unfortunately, the more conservative Anglicanism of the day was also rather more Latin, and I don't think any progress was made on certain issues they inherited from Rome. Since then, of course, the closeness between the two communions has evaporated in the light of such things as homosexual and female ordinations. 80-100 years ago my answer to your question, then would have been cautiously optimistic. Now, well you can look to my opening sentence.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No it is not.... and that's been my point... I would not participate in a service called "communion" and just pretend it's ok because it's only bread and doesn't mean anything.... again, why not just call everything "communion" and we'll share a pack of gum on the subway.

Why not? All the word means is "coming together". It could rightly apply to lots of things.

It's certainly not pointless to them...

I agree.

I truly believe it's possible for them to receive grace from their "sacrament"... but it would be sinful for me to do something contrary to my conscience.

If you don't personally feel comfortable with it, nobody's going to force you... but your argument before made it seem like you were giving a general principle that should apply to all Catholics.

And you believe that it's possible for them to receive grace from communion, despite the opinions of their church and yours on the matter?

 

[Scott1]

Why not? All the word means is "coming together". It could rightly apply to lots of things.

True.... but I believe it "applies" to the teachings on the Eucharist since the begining of the Christian faith.

If you don't personally feel comfortable with it, nobody's going to force you... but your argument before made it seem like you were giving a general principle that should apply to all Catholics.

It does... Catholics are prohibited from "communion" at services that don't have a valid Eucharist.

And you believe that it's possible for them to receive grace from communion, despite the opinions of their church and yours on the matter?

God is not bound by the sacraments.

 

[Dunemeister]

I agree Dunemeister. There is a divide and we need to start bridging that gap. I might point out, however, that the divide is not jsut between the RCC and Protestants, there is also great divides in Protestantism itself.

Quite agreed, just as there are in catholicism (here I have in mind the various Roman Catholic groups that do not acknowledge the validity of Vatican I or Vatican II). We certainly have our work cut out for us. Repentance all around, I say. And that repentance begins by acknowledging what part we played in the original scandal that saw a large portion of the church excommunicated in the sixteenth century.

 

[Scott1]

And that repentance begins by acknowledging what part we played in the original scandal that saw a large portion of the church excommunicated in the sixteenth century.

Amen.

"....But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame. The children who are born into these Communities and who grow up believing in Christ cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brothers, with respect and affection. For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect."
Decree on Ecumenism #3

 

[Dunemeister]

For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect."
Decree on Ecumenism #3

If they are "in communion", why are they denied a place at the table?

 

[Scott1]

If they are "in communion", why are they denied a place at the table?

They/you are not in FULL communion... which, as I said before, would be necessary for shared Communion.

 

[Muffled]

It does seem that someone could do a check on the "holy" wine to see if it had changed to blood.

It didn't inthe Episcopal Church where I received it. Maybe Episcopalians just don't rate with God because they aren't Roman Catholic. Or maybe the reason the Catholic church where I received communnion was preserving the myth by keeping people from taking part in receiving the wine.