Posted on 01/22/2016 2:40:45 PM PST by piusv
The bolded being the slippery slope. Previously the Church NEVER allowed non-Catholics to receive communion unless they first converted to the Catholic Faith...whole and entire.
So when Lutherans and other non-Catholics are allowed to receive communion and when the divorced and remarried are allowed to receive communion, look no further than JPII's 1983 Code of Canon Law...which was the codification of Vatican II.
Since Francis treats Communion so carelessly, one might conclude that he doesn’t believe in the real presence, at least not as the Church teaches.
*Real Presence, I should say.
Christians should put aside their differences and unite to face the latest “Siege of Vienna”, the moslem onslaught against Europe.
I truly believe that Bergoglio does not believe in Transubstantiation.
He kneels to receive “blessings” from heretics. He kneels when he washes the feet of women and non-Catholics on Holy Thursdays. But he will not genuflect when he consecrates the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.
He treats Holy Communion like it is just a communal meal, meant for all.
Don’t forget the “miracle of sharing”.
permitting a Lutheran to receive communion is one thing (and we will discuss, for sure, here) but
permitting a Pelosi (pushing millions of our tax dollars to the baby-killing factories called ‘planned parenthood’) is yet another
Canon Law exists to deny communion to the Pelosis of the world.
Let the Church do that FIRST.
No, let the Church do what it has always done: not allow non-Catholics AND Catholics not in a state of grace to receive communion.
This should not surprise anyone. Pope John Paul II signed an agreement with several Lutheran Synods about a dozen years ago to offer Communion at joint services on special occasions.
I don’t know which synod the Finns belong, but it seems to me that this would be covered. I attended just such a service (and there were several in the area) that was jointly concelebrated with 3 Catholic churches and about 5 Lutheran churches of the area. I don’t think it was a Mass (it was along time ago) but each pastor spoke and read prayers, and the choirs from all of the churches were combined. Communion was offered to all.
I was amazed to see the number of Catholics from our parish there, with Lutheran spouses. These celebrations may have been peculiar to Wisconsin, however, because none of my kids in other states even heard about this mo0mentous occasion. The agreement followed years of negotiations and was signed in Switzerland. I know that the Missouri and Wisconsin Synods refused to sign, so they were not included. Certainly ELCA was well represented. And some other smaller synods, as well.
So if it wasn’t a Catholic mass, it wasn’t the Eucharist, correct? It was Lutheran bread, yes?
Did the Catholics, including the priests, eat it?
paragraphs 153 thru 161 of this document could be of interest???
this may be of interest (especially paragraphs 153—161)
Best,
fhc
ps: sorry if this shows up twice, it didn’t seem to display the first time I sent it thru the internet so here it is (again, possibly) just to be sure.
Nothing Francis does surprises me anymore. He could care less who receives Holy Communion and he never tells protestants they need to convert. He’s met with the who’s who of liberal protestants in the country, from black protestants that call themselves bishops and deacons to grinning Joel Osteen and Rick Warren. He addressed TD Jakes as bishop and never asked a one of them to convert, calling them all “brothers in Christ”. The Catholic Church has had some bad popes in the last 2,000 years, and Francis is right at the top.
A Lutheran Holy Communion is not valid because no priest is present to consecrate the host. All priests that left the church during the Reformation for breakaway sects can not turn the wine and bread into the blood and body of Christ. They have no Holy Orders. No Catholic should attend these services.
Why would that make a difference? The Church has always taught that non-Catholics should not receive the Eucharist regardless of one’s “understanding of the Real Presence”. They HAD TO convert first...and actually BE CATHOLIC.
All of this is a direct result of the false ecumenism promoted at Vatican II.
Why?
Well, it is true now, but at the start of the Reformation there were priests who were still properly ordained (and could still confect the Eucharist). Over time, however, those priests died and the Old Rite was changed so that it was no longer a Catholic Rite. As a result, the New Rite became invalid and did not ordain true Catholic priests that can confect the Eucharist.
There must have been a Mass. It was just so long ago, that I have forgotten. sorry to say, but the homilies and the choir were so outstanding that I’ve forgotten whether there was a Mass. It was held in a Catholic Church and the Priests presiding were Catholic, but the Lutherans fully participated.
Certainly you can have the Eucharist without the Mass, if the bread has been consecrated before (and yes, it was regular wafers). Eucharistic ministers bring the Eucharist to shut-ins all the time without the Mass. The bread was consecrated at a regular Mass and then is taken out by designated ministers, or relatives, to deliver to the shut in. My husband brought me the Eucharist when I was recuperating from my knee replacement surgery.
The service I attended was held in a Catholic Church and presided over by Catholic priests. The Lutherans were there to represent their various groups and participated by giving part of the homily and through their choirs. There was another, similar, service down at the Cathedral presided over by the Archbishop. The Lutherans present all took Catholic Communion. Nobody took “Lutheran Communion”.
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.