Thou shalt not flub thy photo op, Sen. Kerry (Caught taking "communion" in Protestant Church)

With all due respect, it doesn't matter a WHIT what you think about Kerry taking communion at an AME Church.....it's AGAINST HIS Catholic religion!!! It's a HUGE SIN!

"...as far as Catholics are concerned, Protestants are not taking communion, they are engaging in a heretical practice."

From many of the comments I have seen on this forum, a more accurate statement bight be: "...as far as Catholics are concerned, Protestants are heretical."

The fact is that we all believe the denomination (yes, I am including Catholics and Orthodox churches in that category) we adhere to is the right one, else we would go somewhere else. Some denominations are more willing than others to admit that some of the traditions developed by church leaders have little to do with salvation. This is one of those cases, IMHO.

Jesus commanded us to observe communion in remembrance of His suffering and death. Paul confirmed this commandment, with specific warnings about abusing the Lord's table. There were no scriptural guidelines regarding how often communion should be observed, how long you had to be a Christian before you could take communion, or where and with whom it should be taken. The only warning is that we examine our hearts to be sure that we are not taking communion unworthily, i.e. with unrepented sin in our lives. (FWIW, there is also no scripture to support transubstantiation.)

That being said, if Kerry wants to portray himself as a devout Catholic, he should live up to the teaching of that church. I have partaken of communion at Pentecostal, Episcopal, Baptist, Lutheran, and even Catholic services, following the Lord's command to do so in remembrance of Him, and examining my life beforehand to make sure I do not do so unworthily. But my Christian faith does not prohibit me from doing such - apparently, Kerry's does.

Paul warned us about becoming so caught up in the "traditions of men" that we fail to follow Christ. As far as I am concerned, unless you can show me the basis for a teaching in the Bible, I will respect your right to believe it, but I doubt that it has anything to do with salvation. I think God laughs at a lot of the rules and traditions we try to force on each other.

Question from a non-Catholic -

...because those services are not the re-presentation in time and space of Christ's eternal sacrifice on Calvary...

Why is it called an eternal sacrifice? Is it just a reference to the fact that God exists outside our time, or that His sacrifice covers the sin of all humans throughout history, or something else?

Sorry for the delay, my son stopped in for dinner. And this may be more than you asked:

According to Acts 2 the Jews, the followers of Y'shua, met daily (v 46) continuing with one mind in the Temple (this would be the Temple in Jerusalem - these men and women were Jews not Baptists, Prebys, Methodist, Catholics or any of the other denominations that came in following centuries to exclude Jews), and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart.

What has become known as the Last Supper was, when Y'shua and his followers celebrated it, The Feast of Pesach (unleaven bread). Leaven, from Y'shua's teachings, represented sin. The Jews were to clean their house (literally and spiritually), as in their hearts, of sins to partake of the Feast which celebrated their deliverance by YHVH from being slaves in Egypt.

Placed on the table, as to this day, a wine cup and unleaven bread. The head of the household, just as Y'shua practiced His entire life and as host of His last Feast of Pesach, lifted the wine and blessed the wine and table: "Blessed art Thou, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who has granted us life, sustained us and permitted us to celebrate this joyful festival." Then, He would have said prayer: "Let us praise God with this symbol of joy and thank Him for the blessings which this Feast of Pesach brings to us. Our hearts are stirred by memories of deliverance of our forefathers from Egypt. The unleavened bread reminds us of the hardships they endured to remain steadfast to the service of God. May their example teach us fortitude and lead us through noble living to the service of the Eternal God."

He would have then blessed the wine: "Praised art Thou, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who has created the fruit of the vine." The wine cup would be passed round the table and each in turn would drink (which always symbolizes covenant relationship). He then would have broken the bread, dipped it in the salt, and blessed it: "Praised art Thou, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who causes the earth to yield food for all." Each one at the table would likewise partake of the bread and salt. The Pesach Service would have been conducted. Then the meal would be served.

According to the Gospels, Y'shua then, while they were eating, Y'shua took some bread, blessed it, broke it and gave to His disciples, and said: "Take, eat; this is My body." Of course the Jews did not take this literally, because such a statement, in the literal sense, would have been a total aversion to Judiasm. Then He took the cup and gave thanks, and passed it saying: "Drink from it, all of you; for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins." In Jewish culture, this did not mean that they were drinking His blood. Jewish culture held that the wine represented a blood covenant! Wine, as a legal seal, to all covenants represented that the people partaking of the cup of wine were in a blood covenant. Y'shua never would have insinuated that they were actually drinking His blood or eating His flesh - this was a total aversion to Jewish culture. For example, when two people (like Joseph and Mary) were betrothed, her father poured a cup of wine (he then would have called Mary into the room and offered her the cup first - if she took the cup, then she accepted the marriage - if she didn't then there was no marriage), the bride-to-be, the father and the bridegroom would, in turn, take the cup and drink. From that moment they were legally married - they were in covenant (this is why Joseph would have divorced Mary even though they had never been together - this would happen a year after betrothal). Wine always represented a blood covenant! Marriage is a blood covenant - it is not consummated without the blood; that is why some marriages on earth are legal by man's doctrines but not recognized in heaven. The bride was agreeing to be set apart for her bridegroom until he returned to take her to the bridal chamber (which he had to build for her; he would depart telling her "I go to build a chamber for you and I will return") and he could not return for her until his father said he could. His father had to approve the bridal chamber and decide the timing of the wedding (consummation). Then the bridegroom would go in the night and get his bride and take her into the chamber for 7 nights, emerging for the wedding celebration with their family and community.

Communion is a combination of the marriage covenant the celebration of the Festival of Pesach (Passover) when the Jews placed the blood of the lamb upon their doorposts and lintel so the angel of death would pass over. Y'shua is the lamb that takes away the sins of the world! (John 1:29), which by the way is one of the most amazing quotes in the Bible because the Jews had nothing to do with the world. Now, thank the LORD, it says the world and not a denomination or a race!

Every time you celebrate communion you are supposed to have cleansed your heart of leaven (sin); and when you partake of the cup and bread you are showing publicly that you are setting yourself apart, you are in a blood covenant, and you are waiting for your Bridegroom. You partake of the cup of wine to show that you are in blood covenant (not drinking blood).

Y'shua arose on The Feast of First Fruits, which happens to be today!

The concept that communion should be taken with only one sect is ridiculous. Communion happens between a person and GOD, not between that person and the church. This is all just more of that stupid "My church is going to heaven, but yours teaches of concept X which my church views as heretical so you can go to hell whether you love God or not, because you don't love him in our special and copyrighted way". It's all crap. Churches which teach this are full of bull, and aiming for spiritual control of their members. If there isn't a ninth simminarion ecumenical methodist church of thebreians somewhere I'm at, I would feel perfectly at home at a seventeenth reformed baptists temple of the shriners. It's all fine with me so long as they believe Jesus drank non-alcoholic wine in a little plastic cup, as I do.

>>> I am a conservative Lutheran..... I think that taking communion in another church causes no problems whatsoever..<<<

Does NOT look that way to me for at least one Lutheran body, re "the real presence of Christ's body and blood " and "cannot express such unity with the ELCA..". Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS), a conservative Lutheran body, says at their website:

"...To attend communion together people need to be believers in Christ, since beneficial reception is impossible without faith in Christ. To attend communion together people need to recognize the real presence of Christ's body and blood , since otherwise they will be receiving the sacrament to their condemnation. These points are covered in 1 Corinthians 11:17-32...

and

...Another element of attending Communion is that it is an expression of unity and fellowship between those who attend 1 Corinthians 10:16-17. Christians have always regarded the Lord's Supper as one of the strongest expressions of unity. We cannot express such unity with the ELCA, for example, because of its denial of the inerrancy of Scripture and other basic doctrines of the Bible...."

Looks like Kerry violated some Lutheran policies also. I get the impression not only does the candidate 'look' French, his staff is also working a French style work-week and NOT getting the 'job' done.

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=57&cuItem_itemID=5687

I said that what Kerry, a Roman Catholic, did, by "communing" with those who do not have even a _similar_ understanding of Holy Communion, was a mockery.

> what he did was not even Communion. But it _was_ a mockery of Communion.

I said Kerry's action was a mockery.

"what he did was not even Communion. But it _was_ a mockery of Communion."

He's going to hell anyway, so he can do what he wants.

Amen.

> wine

How do you know that?

> no other Christian denomination believes their communion is anything more than a symbol -- with the exception of certain Lutherans at the time of Luther

This is grossly incorrect. In 2004 Lutherans believe Christ's words "this is my body" and "this is my blood". Christ's body and blood are really, truly present in the bread and wine. Lutherans categorically reject a symbolic (liberal protestant) or even purely spiritual (Calvinist) presence. He did not say "this is like my body" or "this ``is'' (wink wink) my body".

He did _not_ say "this shall _turn_ _into_ my body" etc. And He did not say "thou shalt withhold the cup".

What protestant "church" would let someone inside who supports partial birth abortion? Disgusting. Kerry has started to flip-flop on religion now.

This is an AME church, which means it's members are black democrats. They'll have anyone in there who helps them maintain victim status. I guess they forgot Jesus gave us the victory.

"well. Kerry doesn't believe that blacks can be Christians, they don't have souls or something, so "communion" in one of their churches, isn't"

WHAT??

Thanks for the info.

Calling the celebration of the Eucharist in a Protestant Church a 'mockery of communion' is offensive. Akin to a Protestant labeling the Celebration of the Mass idolatry and the veneration of a Jesus cookie.

Well put -- you have explained what was offensive, and why it was offensive. I realized as I was reading through the thread, that old-ager did not mean to offend, but was having trouble just letting it go.

One can criticize Kerry's manipulation of religion without attacking Protestants.

Graciously stated and undeiably correct. Thank you.

John Kerry is wehatever the audience in front of him wants him to be...

Please... Let's get him in front of an audience of Freepers, then he will be what WE want him to be, which is... GONE!!

the infowarrior

John Kerry is wehatever the audience in front of him wants him to be...

Please... Let's get him in front of an audience of Freepers, then he will be what WE want him to be, which is... GONE!!

the infowarrior

It is a tragedy that the table of radical hospitality and unity is such a source of division for Christ's body.

Tragedy beyond words. Let he who has an ear to hear...

See also:

Kerry's Easter Plans Include Catholic Service
[& Communion! Time for a massive Catholic FREEP!]
Yahoo! News (Reuters) ^ | 4/8/04 | Patricia Wilson
Posted on 04/08/2004 5:53:31 PM PDT by Polycarp IV

Kerry's Easter Plans Include Catholic Service

2 hours, 26 minutes ago

Add Politics to My Yahoo!

By Patricia Wilson

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites), a Catholic whose support of abortion rights has prompted some in the Church hierarchy to say they would deny him Communion, will receive the sacrament if he attends Easter Sunday services at Boston's Paulist Center.

Reuters Photo

As the first Catholic at the top of a major party ticket since John F. Kennedy in 1960, Kerry has opened a new debate over religion and politics.

Frequent visits to Protestant churches have led some to question if he was sidestepping the Communion issue, but aides said the Massachusetts senator would celebrate Easter at a Catholic church, probably the Paulist Center in Boston.

In Kennedy's day, voters were afraid that another senator from Massachusetts might follow papal doctrine too strictly. Now, conservative Catholics are attacking Kerry for not adhering to it closely enough.

His position on abortion reflects that of many of America's 65 million Catholics, most of whom are concentrated in big states with the most electoral votes like California and New York. But they have aroused ire among some influential Church leaders.

A practicing Catholic and a former altar boy, Kerry also supports stem cell research and civil unions -- issues he calls matters of conscience.

"I fully intend to practice my religion separately from what I do with respect to my public life and that's the way it ought to be in America," he told reporters in Ohio this week. "There is a separation of Church and State in America and we have prided ourselves about that all of my lifetime, all of our history."

In February, Archbishop Raymond Burke of St Louis advised Kerry not to "present himself for communion" at any church in the city.

In a speech earlier this week, Cardinal Francis George of Chicago said the "great scandal" of the Democratic Party " is that there's no pro-life caucus."

"A party that historically has been concerned about the weakest among us...doesn't permit any freedom of speech around the question of abortion," he said. "One can say, as I have, that the Democratic party has lost its soul."

The leader of Kerry's Boston diocese, Archbishop Sean O'Malley has urged Catholic elected officials -- without mentioning any by name -- who support abortion rights to abstain from Communion, but has not asked priests to stop offering it.

"Archbishop O'Malley has no public statement as to the questions regarding Sen. Kerry and his Catholicism," said Rev. Christopher Coyne, a spokesman for the archdiocese. "The matter has been brought to his attention and I do not know when or if he will make a public statement on this matter."

Kerry and his wife Teresa are regular worshipers at the Paulist Center not far from their Boston townhouse.

The Paulists are a Catholic religious order like the Jesuits or Dominicans. A mission statement posted on their Web site says: "We are a Catholic community that welcomes all, liberates the voice of each and goes forth to live the Gospel of Jesus Christ."

Coyne said the Paulists were, for the most part, autonomous, but still had to abide by some governance of the archbishop. "For example, he has full authority over them as they administer the sacraments and preach within the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston," he said.

Rev. John Ardis, director of the Paulist Center, said the Kerrys had received Communion there and were always welcome to do so. Asked if he had been instructed not to offer Kerry Communion Ardis said: "No. Definitely not. I got a call from them (the archdiocese) an hour ago ... They wanted me to know that the archbishop has not taken a stand and he is free to receive the Eucharist."

CLICK HERE for the rest of that thread