Posted on 10/18/2011 2:09:05 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Yeah, never judged ... that whip He made and used to drive the money changers from the Temple, well that was just ‘janitorial’, right?
Oh many probably dont, they think they are doing the Catholic a favor by showing him a more tolerant accepting open view of religion and this may wean him away from Rome and idol worshipping
(semi sarc)
“If a Catholic receives communion from a Protestant minister, it is generally considered ‘illicit’ or unlawful.”
If you are a follower of Jesus, you are welcome to partake of communion in any Christian church that I’m aware of. It’s a wonderful time to ponder the precious death of our Savior as a community of believers.
Or you can call us anathema, shake the dust off your holy feet, and refuse to share a sacred meal with “Protestants.”
ping
This thread could use a comment from the LCMS perspective.
even the Son of God went postal, occasionally, chip off the block!
As for God the Father, well, ask the Egyptians, you never want to really really really tick off the God of Abraham and Moses...
Respectfully, Gunslingr3,
bear this in mind, from John 6:
“[51] I am the living bread which came down from heaven. [52] If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. [53] The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? [54] Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. [55] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.
[54] “Eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood”... To receive the body and blood of Christ, is a divine precept, insinuated in this text; which the faithful fulfil, though they receive but in one kind; because in one kind they receive both body and blood, which cannot be separated from each other. Hence, life eternal is here promised to the worthy receiving, though but in one kind. Ver. 52. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world. Ver. 58. He that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. Ver. 59. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever.
[56] For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. [57] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. [58] As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. [59] This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever. [60] These things he said, teaching in the synagogue, in Capharnaum.”
When a Catholic receives Holy Eucharist, that is the Body, Blood, Soul, & Divinity of Jesus Christ. Not a symbol, but exactly that. I most certainly may be wrong on this, as I am not a canon lawyer, but I believe that the aforementioned exception to the “No” answer to this question would likely relate to circumstances involving a Catholic at an Orthodox Divine Liturgy, where the belief as to what the Holy Eucharist constitutes is very much as the Catholic view is. Note the expressions used here: http://oca.org/OCchapter.asp?SID=2&ID=53. For a Catholic, the Holy Eucharist is the very center of Mass. This has been our belief, since the Church’s beginning, two thousand years ago. Read the Didache, for some additional information.
I hope that this helps you gain some understanding of the Catholic view in this, sincerely.
Oooo yeah!
Bless your heart!!!!
Since Catholics are Christians, meaning they believe the following:
We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary
and became truly human.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen
If that be the case then welcome fellow believer in the ritual of communion where we remember all the things that our Lord Jesus Christ has done for us. No matter the name on the sign out front.
Amen!!!!!!!!!!!
Amen!!!!!!!!!!!
Spoken like a true Christian. Amen, brother.
No
It's like not having sexual union with a person you're not married to. You may love a person dearly, but if you're not married, you don't do the act which signifies marriage.
I am amazed that the author of this article had the ignorance (or the gall) to refer to Canon 844. It absolutely does not apply here. Canon 844 has to do with valid Sacraments, e.g. in the Orthodox Church, all of whose Sacraments are recognized as valid by the Catholic Church beause they,like we, have preserved the unbroken line of Apostolic Succession.
This is not a put-down of Reformed, Evangelical, Protestant, Baptist or what-have-you, because they do not claim Apostolic Succession as Catholics and Orthodox do; in fact, it has nothing to do with them. It simply does not apply.
In short,the author of this article is regrettably misinformed and sowing confusion.
Catholicism does not permit a Catholic to receive communion in a Protestant Church, whether or not the Protestant Church allows it.
Kind of embarrassing. LOL
Thank you, Mrs. Don-o, for an excellent post.
In the LCMS, we practice (or are supposed to practice) "Closed Communion," that is, we commune only members of churches with which we are in fellowship. The church to which a person belongs is their public confession of the faith. Thus, since the Church of Rome and the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod are not in fellowship, I would not commune a Roman Catholic, nor would I expect to be communed at a Roman Catholic church.
Closed Communion is not something unique to the LCMS. It is the historic Christian practice. It has its roots in the early church, when, if you were wanting to commune at a church in another country, for example, you would need to bring a letter from your bishop, attesting to your orthodoxy.
Thanks for weighting in. I would not expect my pastor to grant communion to a Catholic, now would I take communion in a Catholic church. And we have very close friends who are Catholic who understand this. But that’s me, and part of why I’m LCMS.
Nope. That may be true in some liberal Protestant churches, but it is not the case in the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS), nor in the Wisconsin Synod (WELS) or the ELS. See my post 38.
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.