The "Ecumenical Mass" Has Started

Gloria TV ^ | September 16, 2017 | Gloria TV

[ebb tide]

The group "Spezzare il pane" ("Breaking the Bread") in the archdiocese of Turin, Italy, has officially started with the celebration of "ecumenical masses" where Holy Communion is distributed to Catholics and non-Catholics.

The group is headed by Father Fredo Oliviero, an apologist for illegal immigration, who has the support of his archbishop, Monsignor Cesare Nosiglia. The practice of the group to distribute Holy Communion to non-Catholics, is openly promoted in the newspaper of Turin Archdiocese "La Voce e il Tempo".

Among the members of the group are "Catholics", Anglicans, Baptists, Waldensians and Lutherans. They gather once a month in one of their churches, where they celebrate a "Eucharist" according to the respective denomination, distributing "Communion" to everybody.

According to Fra Cristoforo, writing on maurizioblondet.it, these abuses are recommended by Pope Francis. Archbishop Nosiglia is informed about them but does not intervene. The future goal is to spread such gatherings to other Italian cities.

Distributing Holy Communion to people who do not share the Catholic Faith and have not previously confessed their sins, profanes the Holy Species, leads the participants to condemnation, and promotes superstition.

[Missouri gal]

The better argument that Bergoglio is not pope is because Benedict may have been forced to resign. That would make his resignation invalid (canon 188). A group of Catholics has been pursuing that angle. Until that is proven, to deny he is pope risks schism.
Meanwhile, it has been alleged that he invited Muslim imams to read the Quran and preach Islam in several instances in Catholic churches. This is the crime of desecration, by which, if he did do so, he would have excommunicated himself. An excommunicated person cannot validly exercise any office of the Church, exercise governance, celebrate Mass or officiate any public worship (canon 1335).
Not sure about penalties for knowingly giving Holy Communion to a non-Catholic, but any such rules have not been enforced, to my knowledge. That said, it could also be argued that it amounts to desecration.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Holy Communion is in some ways analogous to the Communion of the spouses in marital love. It isn’t right to do this without marriage: that is, the sacrament of Matrimony by which they pledge themselves to each other with a formal, lasting bond.

Holy Communion is similar in that it isn’t right unless it’s preceded by commitment of a very particular, sacred, permanent and public kind.
You must believe what Catholics believe and be received into the Catholic Church.

It wasn’t your fault st the time because you didn’t know. Peace.

[Terry Mross]

Protestant churches also practice Communion. But the ones I attended do it infrequently.

[Terry Mross]

Protestant churches also practice Communion. But the ones I attended do it infrequently.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Yes, I think most Protestant churches practice Communion. However, as far as I know, they consider it to be a symbol and nothing more. They do not believe it has been transubstantiated into the True Body and Blood of Our Lord: what Catholics call the Real Presence.

Since the beliefs are radically different, Catholics should not receive communion in a Protestant church, and vice versa. Abstaining shows that we respect each others’ different beliefs and we do not pretend it is not important.

On the other hand, I think many of the Protestant Churches -—not all-— practice intercommunion, which means they think it good to share in each others’ bread and wine services.

If I am wrong about thus, I would gladly accept correction.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Lord Jesus, rescue your Bride.

[ebb tide]

I plan to occupy and watch until He comes.

[SubMareener]

That is exactly what He told us to do. I have always thought of you as a T-cell in the immune system of the Body of Christ. :-). See you on the Glassy Sea.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Campion, I composed a very long response to your argument, involving hermeneutic principles, Bible study, etc. Then I realized it would likely be wasted, based on your belief in your argument. It would benefit you greatly to have some formal training in both areas, but you would have to be motivated internally to pursue it. Instead, there is a better way to deal with your argument. You argued that the context is only the verse itself, so whatever it says without any other context (other surrounding verses, chapters, thought divisions in the book itself and the over-arching theme of the book, and the comparison to other verses about the same topic). You wrote, "You try to persuade that context turns "baptism, which saves you now" into "baptism, which doesn't save you now"? I don't think so ..." Yes it does. Here is another verse. Please use your same principle of context of the verse itself only and then go be obedient. “Take the underwear that you bought and are wearing, and go at once to the Euphrates and hide it in a rocky crevice.” Jeremiah 13:4

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Once more with spacing...

Campion, I composed a very long response to your argument, involving hermeneutic principles, Bible study, etc. Then I realized it would likely be wasted, based on your belief in your argument. It would benefit you greatly to have some formal training in both areas, but you would have to be motivated internally to pursue it.

You argued that the context is only the verse itself, so whatever it says without any other context (other surrounding verses, chapters, thought divisions in the book itself and the over-arching theme of the book, and the comparison to other verses about the same topic).

You wrote, "You try to persuade that context turns "baptism, which saves you now" into "baptism, which doesn't save you now"? I don't think so ..."

Yes it does.

Here is another verse.

Please use your same principle of context of the verse itself only and then go be obedient.

“Take the underwear that you bought and are wearing, and go at once to the Euphrates and hide it in a rocky crevice.” Jeremiah 13:4

[Elsie]

You seem to be; shall we say; a bit judgmental...

[Elsie]

Was that wrong?

Well...

The Book that Catholicism has passed down to us says:

1 Corinthians 11:28

"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”

It doesn't seem to be ANYONE's task but your own to answer the question you've posed.

[Elsie]

Does ANY of us know whether we’ll wake up tomorrow?

[Elsie]

The Blessed Mother said that the evil one would have to think he has defeated the Church in order for her to pull the rug out from under him.

She DID??

I've missed that in the NT.

[Elsie]

If there’s anything the sola scriptura crowd hates, it’s scripture being abused.

[Elsie]

Benedict is holding the papal title of “pope emeritus” - again, no provision in Catholic doctrine for such position, nor has such practice ever occurred heretofore in Church history.

Well; when an organization cannot find any justification for POPE in the Word; it's no WONDER that abuses of it can take place with impunity.

[Elsie]

I strongly suggest you refrain from calling Jorge Bergoglio “pope”

Watch it!!!

This is AWFULLY close to what us Prots have been saying FOREVER:

Call no man FATHER!

[Elsie]

And since it was the Catholic Church who authored the book we know as the Bible,

REALLY???

I thought Rome merely ASSEMBLED the bible from bits and pieces of other writings; NONE of which were AUTHORED by Rome.

[Elsie]

: 28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

[Elsie]

I don’t know where you’re getting this stuff from. It doesn’t seem to be based on the actual documents.

Oh?

This is now a requirement?