Posted on 10/10/2014 4:07:21 PM PDT by NYer
Ping!
And that sounds like a question that will eventually come before the courts, too.
Why not communion to anyone in a state of mortal sin? Why not communion to non-Catholics? (I’m against any change, of course.)
That is an interesting question. If Jesus came for sinners, if communion washes away sins, performs miracles of grace, then it would seem more efficacious than all the Holy water and rosaries in the world. And yet, the sacred must be kept from the profane, except in the humanity of our Lord. go figure. That said, I adore.
The post Vatican II Church (under the New Canon Law of 1983)already allows Non-Catholics to receive communion under certain circumstances:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pQIYpYEsCc
Contrast it with the Canon Law of 1917:
Canon 731.2
It is forbidden that the Sacraments of the Church be ministered to heretics and schismatics, even if they ask for them and are in good faith, unless beforehand, rejecting their errors, they are reconciled with the Church.
When will they stop giving it to abortionists?
Are you saying that the Eucharist is rightly meant to be distributed to those who have separated themselves from Christ by their practice?
Huh?
This is getting ridiculous.
Why only two wives? Why not numerous? While we are at it..., why not necromancers, bestialmancers, pediomancers as well? It is only a matter of time and sufficient media obliteration of our arcane views of societal mores!
That’s an interesting question: I think it depends on whether they repent of it or not, as well as what they intended. It isn’t what goes into a man’s mouth that is unclean, but what is in his heart. And yet no one can undone what has been done. Like divorce and remarriage... That said, I am neither.
Oh yes, that too.
Is it really so surprising if they start allowing div/remarried folks to receive communion? Somehow they’ll change Canon Law to allow for it “in certain circumstances” and then everyone can say, “but, but it’s only a change in canon law!!”
Annulment is part of canon law.
Well, there ya go.
What’s ridiculous? The Synod or Cardinal Napier’s reasonable argument against the theme of said Sin-Nod?
proof you have to keep things biblical. you go extra-biblical and you’ve got no way to stop sliding down the slippery slope.
they’re going to bitch at you anyways, regardless if you don,t cave or cave to whatever line you draw further out. might as well not compromise your bilical morality.
but what do you do with people that divorce because of an adulterous relationship?...infidelity?....
“Jesus didn’t say ‘I want the easiest cross to carry.’ He took what was coming. And I think that in many instances married people who find themselves in impossible situations – second-married people – are maybe just called to do that, to carry the cross with Christ.”
Holy Communion is for baptized Catholics in a state of grace, who are properly spiritually prepared and disposed to receive. If you are not in a state of grace or unbelieving, the spiritual consequences to you are very serious. St. Paul on the subject:
Corinthians 11:27-29
So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the Body and Blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves.
Which is just what a polygamist would have to do.
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.