I don’t read posts over 500 words.
Posted on 01/02/2017 4:25:11 AM PST by BlessedBeGod
...If the Church were to change its rules on shared Eucharistic Communion it would “go against Revelation and the Magisterium”, leading Christians to “commit blasphemy and sacrilege,” an Italian theologian has warned.
Drawing on the Church’s teaching based on Sacred Scripture and Tradition, Msgr. Nicola Bux, a former consulter to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, stressed that non-Catholic Christians must have undertaken baptism and confirmation in the Catholic Church, and repented of grave sin through sacramental confession, in order to be able to receive Jesus in the Eucharist.
Msgr. Bux was responding to the Register about concerns that elements of the current pontificate might be sympathetic of a form of “open Communion” proposed by the German Protestant theologian, Jürgen Moltmann.
The concerns have arisen primarily due to the Holy Father’s own comments on Holy Communion and Lutherans, his apparent support for some remarried divorcees to receive Holy Communion, and how others have used his frequently repeated maxim about the Eucharist: that it is “not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.”
The debate specifically over intercommunion with Christian denominations follows recent remarks by Cardinal Walter Kasper who, in a Dec. 10 interview with Avvenire, said he hopes Pope Francis’ next declaration will open the way for intercommunion with other denominations “in special cases.”
The German theologian said shared Eucharistic communion is just a matter of time, and that the Pope’s recent participation in the Reformation commemoration in Lund has given “a new thrust” to the “ecumenical process.”
Pope Francis has often expressed his admiration for Cardinal Kasper’s theology whose thinking has significantly influenced…the priorities of this pontificate, particularly on the Eucharist.
For Moltmann, Holy Communion is “the Lord's supper, not something organized by a church or a denomination”...
(Excerpt) Read more at ncregister.com ...
You wouldn’t want to try to divide the church by rejecting these writers throughout the centuries, would you?
“Teach nothing new, but implant in the hearts of everyone those things which the fathers of venerable memory taught with a uniform preaching ... Whence, we preach nothing except what we have received from our forefathers. In all things, therefore, both in the rule of faith in the observance of discipline, let the pattern of antiquity be observed.” – Pope St. Leo the Great, Father and Doctor of the Church
“’One faith,’ St. Paul writes (Eph. 4:5). Hold most firmly that our faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this, and you dissolve the unity of the Church ... We must hold this for certain, namely: that the faith of the people at the present day is one with the faith of the people in past centuries. Were this not true, then we would be in a different church than they were in and, literally, the Church would not be One.” – St. Thomas Aquinas
“I accept with sincere belief the doctrine of faith as handed down to us from the Apostles by the orthodox Fathers, always in the same sense and with the same interpretation.” – Pope St. Pius X
“The true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but men of tradition.” – Pope St. Pius X
“The Church of Christ, zealous and cautious guardian of the dogmas deposited with it, never changes any phase of them. It does not diminish them or add to them; it neither trims what seems necessary now grafts things superfluous . . . but it devotes all its diligence to one aim: To treat tradition faithfully and wisely; to consolidate and to strengthen what already was clear; and to guard what already was confirmed and defined.” – St. Vincent de Lerins: Commonitoria (5th Century)
I don’t read posts over 500 words.
I know that there is one church that INSISTS it's has the ONLY way to GOD.
I know it claims a LOT of dead people are just WAITING to help me out...
As regards the oft-quoted Mt. 16:18, note the following bishops promise in the profession of faith of Vatican 1:
• Basil of Seleucia, Oratio 25:
'You are Christ, Son of the living God.'...Now Christ called this confession a rock, and he named the one who confessed it 'Peter,' perceiving the appellation which was suitable to the author of this confession. For this is the solemn rock of religion, this the basis of salvation, this the wall of faith and the foundation of truth: 'For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.' To whom be glory and power forever. — Oratio XXV.4, M.P.G., Vol. 85, Col. 296-297.
• Bede, Matthaei Evangelium Expositio, 3:
You are Peter and on this rock from which you have taken your name, that is, on myself, I will build my Church, upon that perfection of faith which you confessed I will build my Church by whose society of confession should anyone deviate although in himself he seems to do great things he does not belong to the building of my Church...Metaphorically it is said to him on this rock, that is, the Saviour which you confessed, the Church is to be built, who granted participation to the faithful confessor of his name. — 80Homily 23, M.P.L., Vol. 94, Col. 260. Cited by Karlfried Froehlich, Formen, Footnote #204, p. 156 [unable to verify by me].
• Cassiodorus, Psalm 45.5:
'It will not be moved' is said about the Church to which alone that promise has been given: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I shall build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.' For the Church cannot be moved because it is known to have been founded on that most solid rock, namely, Christ the Lord. — Expositions in the Psalms, Volume 1; Volume 51, Psalm 45.5, p. 455
• Chrysostom (John) [who affirmed Peter was a rock, but here not the rock in Mt. 16:18]:
Therefore He added this, 'And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; that is, on the faith of his confession. — Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew, Homily LIIl; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf110.iii.LII.html)
• Cyril of Alexandria:
When [Peter] wisely and blamelessly confessed his faith to Jesus saying, 'You are Christ, Son of the living God,' Jesus said to divine Peter: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church.' Now by the word 'rock', Jesus indicated, I think, the immoveable faith of the disciple.”. — Cyril Commentary on Isaiah 4.2.
• Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII):
“For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, 1 Corinthians 10:4 and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, and the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.'
“For all bear the surname ‘rock’ who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters.” — Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII), sect. 10,11 ( http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/101612.htm)
• Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II): Thus our one immovable foundation, our one blissful rock of faith, is the confession from Peter's mouth, Thou art the Son of the living God. On it we can base an answer to every objection with which perverted ingenuity or embittered treachery may assail the truth."-- (Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II), para 23; Philip Schaff, editor, The Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers Series 2, Vol 9.
Deny this, and you dissolve the unity of the Church
What a ridiculous comparison.
There is no comparison between the Holy Spirit and the Roman Catholic church. Not even close to the same league at all.
The HOLY SPIRIT is the One who assists us in our walk with Christ. Angels may protect us but can't offer any assistance by direct communication or impartation to us.
Dead people called *saints* can't do a blasted thing.
Nor can martyrs. They, like all dead people are powerless to help.
And unified, unchanging truth? What a joke!
I thought the EO claimed that. How come you guys have such different doctrine? You both claim to be the original church with the other group in schism. So who's right and why?
You're the one here claiming that this current catholic church is wrong and then you make a statement like that about not dividing the church?
You are too funny sometimes.
Ah yes, another example of your determination to maintain your invincible ignorance by willful disregard for anything which might hold truth open for you. If it were not so tragic (because of what it implies regarding your eternal destiny), then your exhibits of this invincible ignorance would be comical.
A perverse analogy, for the reality of the Spirit of God is clearly manifest in Scripture, in contrast to (again) what the NT church in Scripture (as seen in Acts onward, which are interpretive of the gospels) did NOT profess/teach practice, such as:
• Praying to created beings in Heaven , which is utterly unseen in Scripture despite prayer being so basic a practice that the Holy Spirit inspired the recording of approx. 200 prayers by believers. Only pagans prayed to someone else!
• That the act of baptism itself renders souls formally justified by their own holiness so that they would directly enter Heaven i they died at the time of the baptism, but with the same (as practically imperfect) later usually having to endure postmortem purifying torments in order to become good enough (and atone for venial sins) to enter Heaven, and making offerings and prayers in order to obtain early release from this unScriptural RC purgatory.
• That believers were separated into two classes, one formally called "saints," the latter being the only believers who directly go to Heaven at death, contrary to Scripture. (Lk. 23:43 [cf. 2Cor. 12:4; Rv. 2:7]; Phil 1:23; 2Cor. 5:8 [“we”]; 1Cor. 15:51ff'; 1Thess. 4:17)
• Ordaining a separate class of believers distinctively titled "priests ," whose primary active function was conducting the Lord's supper and offering up "real" flesh and blood as a sacrifice for sin.
• That the Catholic Eucharist was the paramount, supreme prevalent practice in the life of the church, the "source and summit of the Christian life," in which "our redemption is accomplished," around which all else basically revolved.
•That presbuteros (senior/elder) and episkopos (superintendent/overseer) denoted two separate classes .
• That celibacy was a requirement for clergy .
• Directing the church to look to Peter as the first of a line of supreme infallible popes reigning over the churches from Rome, whom they were especially enjoined to honor and obey.
• That the magisterial office possessed ensured magisterial infallibility (thereby infallibly declaring that she is infallible), enabling them to even claim to essentially "remember" an extraScriptural event which lacks even early historical testimony. , and was opposed by RC scholars themselves the world over as being apostolic tradition.
• Choosing apostolic successors (or preparations for it) as was done for Judas (n order to maintain the original number of 12: Rv. 21:14) by casting lots, (no politics). (Acts 1:15ff; cf. Prov. 16:33; Leviticus 16:5,8,9-10,15-16,29-30) despite the vacancy left by the martyrdom of the apostle James. (Acts 12:1,2)
More to see by God's grace.
“...You’re the one here claiming that this current catholic church is wrong and then you make a statement like that about not dividing the church? ...”
Did Judas divide the church or did he leave it?
The faithful Catholic doesn’t divide the church. The apostates who LOOK like the church have left the church. Don’t be fooled by their costumes. They left the church just as Mr. Luther and his throngs did.
Why do you think “Francis” is leading a celebration of Mr. Luther’s rebellion?
The pseudo-Catholics did it more cleverly than Mr. Luther, though, because his followers didn’t make-off with nearly all the outer garments and the buildings and the pew sitters.
Fortunately they left us the true Mass when they reinvented it. They could never take that from us.
The blessed mother sewed Jesus a SEAMLESS garment. The blessed members of the true church are that seamless garment with no division and with continuous unbroken tradition and doctrine.
I understand the iRC ntolerance of what exposes the spurious nature of Rome, and the love of brevity by traditional RCs in the light of prolix encyclicals, at least since your sophist reply to almost 2,000 words by boatbums .
“...in Scripture...in Scripture...in Scripture...in Scripture...in Scripture...in Scripture...in Scripture...in Scripture...in Scripture...” (sarc by R&B to represent d1212’s mindset)
From ST. JOHN - Chapter 20
30 *Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book.
Where “in Scripture” is found the chapter and verse that informs you that only “in Scripture” will be found all the many other signs also that did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, “which are not written in this book”?!
One pitcher worth TWO 500 word replies...
LOL! “Pitcher”.
LOL, the twisted Catholic minds tries to frame a question! LOLROF
I saw that.
Too ironic, eh?
So you're comparing yourself to Judas now? After all, you are rejecting the authority of the Catholic church as it now is.
Really, now......
The blessed mother sewed Jesus a SEAMLESS garment.
You know this how?
Source?
The blessed members of the true church are that seamless garment with no division and with continuous unbroken tradition and doctrine.
Which rite? The EO or the Roman rite?
And it sprang from which of the 7 churches that Jesus addressed in Revelation?
Unbroken tradition? Prove it. Document it and show that the RCC has been unbroken and passed down faithfully and flawlessly for 2,000 years since the day of Pentecost.
You are asking a nonsense question.
Non-Catholics never claimed that everything Jesus did was written down. So there would be no source to look them up because they aren't written down.
However, the Catholic church makes claims that it teaches things that Jesus did that weren't written down, on which they have slapped the disingenuous label of *sacred tradition*.
Which means nothing as not a thing of *sacred tradition* can be verified. It's just someone's claim.
So the Catholic church says, *Trust us*, as does every villain in fairy tales.
Trust the shifting sands of Catholicism with my eternal soul?
Nope. I'm trusting Jesus instead. I know HE will never lie or fail me.
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.