“You had better happily hand out that wafer, or give me my money back!”

non veni pacem ^ | May 15, 2018 | unknown

[ebb tide]

Not a parody. This is really happening. HERE

The President of Germany…Frank-Walter Steinmeier said: “Let us seek ways of expressing the common Christian faith by sharing in the Last Supper and Communion. I am sure: Thousands of Christians in interdenominational marriages are hoping for this.”

 

 

Cardinal Marx echoed the words of the German President, saying: “When someone is hungry and has faith, they must have access to the Eucharist. That must be our passion, and I will not let up on this.”

Protestant German comedian Eckart von Hirschhausen caused particular controversy by demanding to be “handed that wafer” because, since he is married to a Catholic, he pays his Church tax. “I don’t see the point of a public debate about wafers,” …he said that, since he paid his Church tax, the Church had “better happily hand out a wafer for it, or give me back my money!”

The abomination of desolation much? First it’s Catholics in obstinate grave sin who get to receive, then proddies. Who’s next? Non-Christians. Who’s next? Atheists. Remember, there are atheist saints, you know, so why shouldn’t they have access to the Blessed Sacrament? Why would you deny them “food for the journey”? You’re mean!

As I wrote barely a week ago about this, it will be those bishops, priests and laymen who hold fast to true doctrine who will be accused of “eating and drinking unworthily,” and it’s going to get very, very nasty. It has all been laid out precisely in Amoris Laetitia #186 HERE.

#186 The Eucharist demands that we be members of the one body of the Church. Those who approach the Body and Blood of Christ may not wound that same Body by creating scandalous distinctions and divisions among its members. This is what it means to “discern” the body of the Lord, to acknowledge it with faith and charity both in the sacramental signs and in the community; those who fail to do so eat and drink judgement against themselves (cf. v. 29). The celebration of the Eucharist thus becomes a constant summons for everyone “to examine himself or herself ” (v. 28), to open the doors of the family to greater fellowship with the underprivileged, and in this way to receive the sacrament of that Eucharistic love which makes us one body. We must not forget that “the ‘mysticism’ of the sacrament has a social character”. When those who receive it turn a blind eye to the poor and suffering, or consent to various forms of division, contempt and inequality, the Eucharist is received unworthily. On the other hand, families who are properly disposed and receive the Eucharist regularly, reinforce their desire for fraternity, their social consciousness and their commitment to those in need.

Analysis:

Paragraph #186 teaches precisely the OPPOSITE of what St. Paul teaches. In this version, it is those who have failed to share the Eucharist (aka rigid doctors of the law who withhold the Eucharist from those unworthy to receive) who are guilty of taking the Eucharist unworthily themselves. Is it not abundantly clear what he means by “open the doors to greater fellowship with the ‘underprivileged’”? The people who fail to discern – the guilty ones – are the mean people who are blocking “unity” by denying the Eucharist to others. It’s the Faithful Catholics who are the ones creating “scandalous distinctions…divisions, contempt, inequality.”…

The logical ends of this are now playing out before our eyes:

1. Unrepentant mortal sinners must be shown mercy, because unity is the ultimate commandment
2. The law remains unchanged, but it is to be seen merely as an “ideal”
3. The mercy of God transcends the reality of the law
4. Those who refuse to accept this “greater reality” commit mortal sin themselves
5. The transcendence of the Spirit also extends to protestants, non-Christians, and atheists, because “a little bread and wine does no harm”, we are all children of God, proselytizing is solemn nonsense, and atheists go to Heaven. Capiche?

Do you now understand why the non-response from Antipope Bergoglio to the dubia and every other letter, petition and plea put before him? The referential footnotes in Chapter Eight having been long ago exposed as completely dishonest, falsely claiming continuity with traditional thought, Bergoglio needs to lay claim to channeling a higher authority: The Third Person of the Trinity, of course. And so he will cite Holy Scripture as a CONTRAST to the closed-mindedness of the mean Old Church for failing to properly declare the “doctrine” of Unity through Diversity/Sharing, and will accuse orthodox Catholics of heresy for calling him out on it. This isn’t “big tent” Catholicism, this is the annihilation of Catholicism. Are you ready for what that means for you?

Please go read the whole post, so you fully understand.

[Montana_Sam]

Cardinal Marx is a heretic. And the Pope isn’t raising a finger. Well.

[posterchild]

part of the problem is a government which taxes citizens to support a church. church membership and support should be independent of govt action.