Posted on 11/16/2015 7:06:16 AM PST by NRx
Francis continues to, um, amaze. From Rocco Palmaâs report on the Popeâs meeting with Lutherans in Rome on Sunday, as part of an ecumenical dialogue:
In an answer thatâs almost certain to resonate broadly across the ecumenical scene (and elsewhere, quite possibly show his hand on his intended course following last monthâs Synod on the Family), the pontiff â clearly wrestling with the plea â pointedly appealed less to the standard prohibition of the Eucharist for Protestant communities than to the womanâs discernment in conscience.
As if to reinforce the point, in a move clearly decided in advance, Francis publicly presented the pastor with a chalice which appeared identical to the ones the Pope gave the archbishops of Washington, New York and Philadelphia during his late September US trip.
Quoting from his answer to a question posed by a Lutheran woman married to a Catholic man, about when she and her husband can expect to receive holy communion together (it is forbidden in the Catholic Church for non-Catholics â Orthodox Christians excepted under certain conditions â to receive communion):
I can only respond to your question with a question: what can I do with my husband that the Lordâs Supper might accompany me on my path? Itâs a problem that each must answer [for themselves], but a pastor-friend once told me that âWe believe that the Lord is present there, he is presentâ â you believe that the Lord is present. And whatâs the difference? There are explanations, interpretations, but life is bigger than explanations and interpretations. Always refer back to your baptism â one faith, one baptism, one Lord: this Paul tells us; and then consequences come later.
I would never dare to give permission to do this, because itâs not my own competence. One baptism, one Lord, one faith. Talk to the Lord and then go forward. [Pauses] And I wouldnât dare â I donât dare say anything more.
In other words: let your conscience be your guide. Who is the Pope to judge?
It is not in the competence of the pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church to say that a Protestant cannot receive communion in a Catholic mass? Really? The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:
1400 Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, âhave not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders.â It is for this reason that, for the Catholic Church, Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible. However these ecclesial communities, âwhen they commemorate the Lordâs death and resurrection in the Holy Supper . . . profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory.â
âEucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possibleâ is now âOne baptism, one Lord, one faith. Talk to the Lord and then go forward.â
Of course he âwould never dare to give permission to do this,â the Jesuit pope said, Jesuitically, but said so in winking at doing that very thing. Hard to avoid the conclusion that Pope Francis just effectively rewrote the Catechism, and destroyed a Eucharistic discipline that has existed since the Reformation. Did you ever think you would live to see this? The Pope is refuting the magisterial teaching of his own Church, and not on a small matter either.
The Catholic anthropologist Mary Douglas, in her celebrated 1968 book Natural Symbols, writes:
Now I turn to the other example of how messages about symbols issue from the Vatican only to be decoded here [England] as messages about ethics. The celebration of the Eucharist is central to Catholic dogma. If this gets bowdlerized, then the tendency which Herberg describes for denominations to become social compartments empty of distinguishing empty of distinguishing doctrines will have worked its way right through the modern world. Historic, sacramental Catholicism will have faded out.
She goes on to talk about how the condensation of symbols in the Catholic Eucharist is âstaggering in its depth.â Says Douglas, âIf it were just a matter of expressing all these themes, symbolizing and commemorating, much less blood and ink would have been spilt at the Reformation.
She talks about how Catholics view the Eucharist as being, for Catholics, a âreal, invisible transformationâ of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of the deity, and this having âsaving efficacy for those who take it and for others.
It is based on a fundamental assumption about the human role in religion. It assumes that humans can take an active part in the work of redemption, both to save themselves and others, through using the sacraments as channels of grace â sacraments are not only signs, but essentially different from other signs, being instruments. This touches on the belief in opus operatum, the efficacious rite, whose very possibility was denied by the Protestant reformers.
Douglas, quoting a scholar of the Reformation, says that the Reformationâs most powerful effect was to turn Christianity into a religion of inner feeling. It did that not by toppling the Pope, but by changing the sacramental system. âFor the Catholic Church, it was not the attack on the Papacy that was the most fateful event which has happened in the Reformation, but the emptying out from her Mysteries of the objective source of power.â
And yesterday, the Pope â the Pope! â told a Lutheran woman to âcome forwardâ because âlife is bigger than explanations and interpretations.â
Poor historical, sacramental Catholicismâ¦
Your reply is not exactly on point, since the Lutheran woman involved confesses belief that the body and blood of the Lord are present in the elements after consecration.
A lot of protestants, perhaps as much as 30%, believe this to be true of the Catholic Eucharist.
So, whatever “Lutherans believe”, this particular woman believes to a reasonable approximation what Catholics are supposed to believe (many Catholics, as you know, don’t believe it).
The pope’s answer makes some sense in that context.
Lutherans:
More catholic than Catholics!
Why are you getting all worked up over this? Pope JP II did this about 15 years ago. He opened Communion on special occasions to Lutherans — I forget which Synod. It was NOT Missouri or Wisconsin Synod because they did not accept the invitation.
They signed documents (in Switzerland, I think) and we had a joint service and concelebration at our (Catholic) Church with many families having their Lutheran spouses at our service for the first time. There were also services in Milwaukee. We had all of the priests in our County and all of the Lutheran ministers engaged in this prayer and communion service. And choirs representing all of the churches involved.
I’ve never heard another peep about it.
1401 When, in the Ordinary's judgment, a grave necessity arises, Catholic ministers may give the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church, who ask for them of their own will, provided they give evidence of holding the Catholic faith regarding these sacraments and possess the required dispositions.
Since Vatican II, non-Catholics already receive communion without conversion....something previously condemned by the Catholic Church.
Be rooted in Christ!
Francis could care less about Catholic doctrine. He could care less if protestants, muslims, hindu, buddist, all came up for Holy Communion. He DOES NOT CARE. This man will go down in history as the absolute worst pope in the last 1,000 years. He takes offense if someone calls him pope.
So far no women priests in the Catholic Church, and so far no openly homosexual clergy. This can not be said in some Lutheran churches, which allow it. There are also some Lutheran churches overseas that allow same-sex marriages.
So far none of these anti-God nonsense is allowed in the Catholic Church.
No,
They believe in two things consubstantiation and transubstantiation at the same time. I doubt that many know this.
Nope, instead the Catholics eagerly embrace pro-abort politicians and shuffle around homosexual molesters.
See, it can go both ways.
Of course, there are 3 different synods who call themselves Lutheran in the US, and only one of them has eagerly embraced the gehys. The other two have consistently refused to do so.
Have you ever had communion in a Catholic mass, although the priest said that it was for Catholics, only? I did that, during a wedding.
Adds to my suspicions that Consecration in a post- Vatican II liturgy may not be valid. Certainly would solve the "those who shouldn't be getting the Holy Eucharist" problem.
Where are you getting this information about the Catholic church? I believe it is mistaken.
Or is it just your opinion? Then say so.....
“Nope, instead the Catholics eagerly embrace pro-abort politicians and shuffle around homosexual molesters.”
Lutherans, as well as other protestant faiths read from a Bible I’m not familiar with. Of course the Catholic Church has sinners, but not official doctrine that codifies sin like protestants. I just wonder what verse they find in the Bible that say two men can get married, women can preach the gospel and openly homosexual men can be ordained as pastors. If you can come up with these verses please let me know.
So, which Bible passages does your religion of catholiciism use to ordain purgatory or declaring the Mother of Jesus as a mediatrix, and essential to Catholics salvation?
Hah. I can’t come up with those verses because they don’t exist. But then again, the LCMS, which I am part of, and which is Lutheran, doesn’t embrace sodomy, women pastors, or sodomite pastors.
My point was that if someone’s going to toss around unfounded accusations against all Lutherans because of the actions of some people who call themselves such, one could easily do the same to all Catholics.
Well, you can look back in the news a bit to see how the Roman Catholic bishops in the US are communing pro-abortion politicians, and I remember the sexual scandal in the 90s very well.
Having said that, my point wasn’t that all Catholics believe in those ugly things. Only one Lutheran synod out of three in the US eagerly embraces the gehy, but I see no small amount of Catholics eagerly piling on all Lutherans the blasphemy of some people who call them that.
My point was that if we were going to keep on slapping Lutherans with the actions of some of them, I could easily dig up some nasty things that were done by Catholics. That particular sword cuts both ways.
Personally, I’d rather that we found enough common ground to stop bashing each other outside of debate halls and started fighting the leftists who want both of us dead.
I never said all Lutheran synods had sold their soul to the devil, just some of them.
Not a Lutheran belief. Neither is transubstantiation. Only a lib Lutheran who had no grounding would go to Catholic communion. It fails on the corporate confession angle.
As a Lutheran, not so sure I’d want to take Communion with a church that still considers Luther a heretic.
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.