Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: sitetest
I'm kidding about the telescope, of course, but I posted the article for a serious discussion.

I worship every week in an RC church with my Catholic wife, and my kids are in CCD.

Fr. Iggy's point is very real. I'm sure the Reverend Mr. Graham is much closer to the Catholic faith than many (in some places, most) of the weekly communicants.

When you defend the policy of Eucharistic exclusion, what is the basis for deciding who is in and who is out?

A system where Sr. Joan Chittester and other notorious heretics are in, while otherwise orthodox Christians who have not been granted the faith to see the Church as the Church sees herself are out, is incoherent.

Fr.Iggy's gesture, seen in this light, was not so bad.

8 posted on 04/22/2006 5:20:13 PM PDT by Jim Noble (And you know what I'm talkin' 'bout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: Jim Noble

Dear Jim Noble,

"I'm kidding about the telescope, of course, but I posted the article for a serious discussion."

Yes, I know, I've seen you post about this before.

"A system where Sr. Joan Chittester and other notorious heretics are in, while otherwise orthodox Christians who have not been granted the faith to see the Church as the Church sees herself are out, is incoherent."

What's incoherent is not that we keep non-Catholics from the Eucharist, but that a better job isn't done of proclaiming Catholic Truth to the flock.

The incoherent thing is not that you're prevented from receiving the Blessed Sacrament in a Catholic Church but that Sr. Chittester isn't made to face her false beliefs.

However, that being said, if a priest is doing the right thing by courageously proclaiming Catholic Truth (I've known more than one), then he is also bound to judge that those who are already formally members of the Catholic Church accept Catholic teaching, unless an individual specifically makes clear that he doesn't.

Even then, for formal members of the Catholic Church, one may be a material heretic and yet not a formal heretic, and the benefit of the doubt must be given to that individual that any heretical beliefs he holds are out of ignorance, not out of willfullness and obstinancy.

On the other hand, the non-Catholic who refuses to enter the Catholic Church has in some sense already formally refused what Catholicism believes.

I'm sure that you'll find this explanation inadequate. That's partly because I'm inadequate at making it, but I suspect at least partly because you just don't accept certain critical elements of Catholic teaching. I think it's likely that you especially don't accept the Church's ecclesiology.

I, however, do accept all that the Catholic Church teaches authoritatively, and I can tell you, from the perspective of the believer, it makes perfect sense to exclude non-Catholics from the Eucharist.


sitetest


9 posted on 04/22/2006 5:40:55 PM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson