Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I understand Catholics belief about it more now. I have always believed we should make sure our lives are worthy of taking communion before doing so, which is why for quite a while when going to church I wouldn't partake.
What if a person wasn't a Catholic, but did believe it is Jesus' literal body and blood? Would the priest let him partake?
I'm not really sure of that answer, and I don't know how I feel about it either. On one hand I wouldn't want to deny anybody our Lords flesh and blood, but on the other hand, it is kinda milking the cow through the fence. What the teaches on this, I don't really know.
I'm not really sure of that answer, and I don't know how I feel about it either. On one hand I wouldn't want to deny anybody our Lords flesh and blood, but on the other hand, it is kinda milking the cow through the fence. What the teaches on this, I don't really know.
What if a person wasn't a Catholic, but did believe it is Jesus' literal body and blood? Would the priest let him partake?
A member of church which is in Communion with Rome may take Communion in a Catholic church. So if you belong to a Byzantine church, say Greek Orthodox, you could take Communion in a Catholic church. If, however, you are Protestant you may not. If a Protestant, for example, were to present him or herself for Communion and the priest knew that individual was Protestant or of a faith not in communion with the Catholic church the priest should, quietly, deny that person the Eucharist.
. . . the priest should, quietly, deny that person the Eucharist.
Jesus wanted this done "in remembrance of Him" . . . NOT as some magical nonsense instituted by humans in a form of ritualized idol worship. To deny one the opportunity to remember Jesus as He requested is disrespectful . . . if not blasphemous. I wouldn't want that responsibility on my shoulders.
Jesus wanted this done "in remembrance of Him" . . . NOT as some magical nonsense instituted by humans in a form of ritualized idol worship. To deny one the opportunity to remember Jesus as He requested is disrespectful . . . if not blasphemous. I wouldn't want that responsibility on my shoulders.
Why you do something has Absolutely NO affect on what is being done.
"Do the dishes because if you don't I'll kill you"
"Do the dishes because if you do I'll pay you"
"Do the dishes because if you don't the world will end"
Each way you're doing the same think regardless of why you're doing it. So the argument of do this IN REMBERENCE OF ME, is not an argument because it has no affect on what is being done, only the reason WHY it is being done.
Jesus wanted this done "in remembrance of Him" . . . NOT as some magical nonsense instituted by humans in a form of ritualized idol worship. To deny one the opportunity to remember Jesus as He requested is disrespectful . . . if not blasphemous. I wouldn't want that responsibility on my shoulders.
That is not what the question was about or my answer. The OP had a specific question pertaining to the Catholic church which I answered. I realize your rabid anti-catholocism prevents you from participating in these discussions with any semplence of decorum but you might want to at least try and comprehend a post before responding to it. You probably won't be able to but it's worth the effort.
Jesus wanted this done "in remembrance of Him" . . . NOT as some magical nonsense instituted by humans in a form of ritualized idol worship. To deny one the opportunity to remember Jesus as He requested is disrespectful . . . if not blasphemous. I wouldn't want that responsibility on my shoulders.
Mystic,
I've always appreciated your willingness to respectfully discuss our Catholic beliefs, and feel I can openly respond to you.
The Catholic mass is rich in symbolism and sacrament in hopes that we humans can experience God with all of our senses. Why limit the experience to hearing.
As a Catholic, I regularly read the word of God. And as a Catholic I eat the word of God, because I believe the "word" was made "flesh".
And Jesus must of had something in mind when he made the radical statement "eat my flesh" and "drink my blood". It was shockiing to many then, and it appears to be shocking to many still today.
So by faith, my belief that I am in fact eating and drinking the "word" of God, in addition to hearing, reading, and contemplating His word I experience a fullness that I have found lacking in other congregations.
No doubt, the Eucharist is barely understood even by many Catholics, and may incorrectly border on some "magical" ceremony. But when fully understood in all of it's richness, one understands why we Catholics believe the Eucharist is the summit of our celebration.
To put a piece of bread and a sip of wine in my mouth, only as a way to "remember" Christ, seems to miss the boat. What does that mean? Why would Christ specifically ask us to go through the excersise? Why did the Apostles give specific instruction about this, if it was only for us to chew on some bread, and drink some wine and think about Jesus?
I'd suggest for anyone who really wants to dig deep into the profound mystery of the eucharist to read Thomas A Kempis "Imitation of Christ".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.... 
