Posted on 09/21/2004 11:07:47 PM PDT by Salvation
|
|||
|
|||
Remember the Catechism of the Catholic Churchs definition of a sacrament: A sacrament is an outward sign instituted by Christ to give grace. Our Lord instituted the sacraments, and the Church has the duty of preserving their integrity. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Saunders, Rev. William. "Bread and Wine." Arlington Catholic Herald. This article is reprinted with permission from Arlington Catholic Herald. THE AUTHOR Father William Saunders is dean of the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College and pastor of Our Lady of Hope Parish in Sterling, Virginia. The above article is a "Straight Answers" column he wrote for the Arlington Catholic Herald. Father Saunders is also the author of Straight Answers, a book based on 100 of his columns and published by Cathedral Press in Baltimore. Copyright © 2004 Arlington Catholic Herald |
**Another point: Any priest should have known better. Objectively, the tampering with the matter and form of a sacrament is a mortal sin.**
Uh-oh!
**Second, wheat hosts can be made in which the gluten has been almost completely removed. Several convents of religious sisters, who make hosts to help support themselves financially, now offer wheat hosts in which nearly all the gluten has been removed.**
Good information here. I was unaware of this.
**The Second Vatican Council taught, "For the most Holy Eucharist contains the Churchs entire spiritual wealth: Christ Himself, our Passover and Living Bread. Through His own flesh, now made living and life-giving by the Holy Spirit, He offers life to men" (Presbyterorum Ordinis 5).**
Great summary!
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Catholic Discussion Ping List.
Do you guys ping me to these things just to pick a fight or what? Just curious.
Matthew 13:34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:
Mark 4:34 But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.
Matthew 13:10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
Matthew 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
Matthew 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
Mark 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all [these] things are done in parables:
Luke 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
Pretty much speaks for itself don't it. John 6 is parable or metaphor. We know this blatently from the witness of three of the Gospels directly on point because more than just the apostles are present and only the apostles were given the straight dope. QED. Kinda makes the discussion moot; but, then I'm still wondering why you guys ping me and then scream when I respond.
If you don't want the truth, don't ping me.. for the upteenth time.
"Canon 926 says
"Keep in mind, the Church is not upholding "man-made rules," as some like to charge; rather, the Church is preserving and defending what our Lord instituted.
Ah, yeah right! Enough said.
Setting aside for the moment the fact that you are a moron, you should cite another column by this author in which he describes such activity as a "peccadillo".
That's your assumption.
If everything that Christ said is parable, then salvation is just a parable and heaven is just a parable and the social gospellers are right.
Not every word that Christ spoke was a parable.
Codification is not proof, of itself, of the "man made" origins of a rule.
The Federal gov't and the several states all have codes against types of murder, for example. Do you think this means that the prohibition against murder if therefore "man-made"?
SD
Absolutely true. If codification is proof of a man-made rule, than the New Testament Canon is wholly the invention of the Church.
My question is, why doesn't the little girl receive the blood of Christ? The reason given by her mother is because she doesn't think any amount of alcohol is appropriate for children. I found this answer actually abhorrent and ignorant by the mother. She is in fact denying her child of communion with Christ because she wants to play politics with the Church.
The other telling sign about this whole story and the people speaking out for the mother and her child (Through letters to the editor in the local rags) keep calling the Eucharist a symbol. These people are supposed to be Catholics but they are totally ignorant of their faith. Secondly, after consecration they are the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, and are to be referred as such.
There is still some gluten in them.
Your remark is not necessary and is definitely not in line with keeping the discussion on the subject posted.
**My question is, why doesn't the little girl receive the blood of Christ?**
One would wonder why her priest has not so informed her.....
Well, if "low-gluten" is not an option for an individual, they would just receive under the form of wine.
First, the little girl who is allergic to the gluten in wheat could make her first Holy Communion by receiving the Precious Blood from the chalice. The fullness of grace is truly present and given by receiving just the sacred host, or just the Precious Blood, or both.
SD
He did. But momma didn't want her little girl drinking that evil alcohol. Cause, you know, a sip of wine can kill a child.
Many priest in mortal sin!
You are correct.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.