Posted on 01/02/2017 4:25:11 AM PST by BlessedBeGod
...If the Church were to change its rules on shared Eucharistic Communion it would “go against Revelation and the Magisterium”, leading Christians to “commit blasphemy and sacrilege,” an Italian theologian has warned.
Drawing on the Church’s teaching based on Sacred Scripture and Tradition, Msgr. Nicola Bux, a former consulter to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, stressed that non-Catholic Christians must have undertaken baptism and confirmation in the Catholic Church, and repented of grave sin through sacramental confession, in order to be able to receive Jesus in the Eucharist.
Msgr. Bux was responding to the Register about concerns that elements of the current pontificate might be sympathetic of a form of “open Communion” proposed by the German Protestant theologian, Jürgen Moltmann.
The concerns have arisen primarily due to the Holy Father’s own comments on Holy Communion and Lutherans, his apparent support for some remarried divorcees to receive Holy Communion, and how others have used his frequently repeated maxim about the Eucharist: that it is “not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.”
The debate specifically over intercommunion with Christian denominations follows recent remarks by Cardinal Walter Kasper who, in a Dec. 10 interview with Avvenire, said he hopes Pope Francis’ next declaration will open the way for intercommunion with other denominations “in special cases.”
The German theologian said shared Eucharistic communion is just a matter of time, and that the Pope’s recent participation in the Reformation commemoration in Lund has given “a new thrust” to the “ecumenical process.”
Pope Francis has often expressed his admiration for Cardinal Kasper’s theology whose thinking has significantly influenced…the priorities of this pontificate, particularly on the Eucharist.
For Moltmann, Holy Communion is “the Lord's supper, not something organized by a church or a denomination”...
(Excerpt) Read more at ncregister.com ...
Sure. Find the verses that tell us we have to suck at the teat of Catholicism.
And show us which books of the Bible Luther threw out.
Hey, bb.
You're on for this one.
And he's NOT my *beloved* Mr. Luther.
Never read his writings and not interested in doing so.
Mr. Luther told you to reject Rome and Catholicism.
He told me nothing. Never met the man.
You and you rest of his huge cult believed on him and followed him.
Nope. I have not believed on Luther. My faith and trust is in Jesus alone.
I don't care what Luther thinks. So you can cease and desist from making those false accusations anymore, especially since you've been corrected more than once about that.
I understand there is a diversity of opinion in Catholicism on what is metaphor and what is concrete reality in John 6. However, to the best of my knowledge, there is no authoritative position of the RCC on this passage. Not such as could be claimed infallible. This leaves the poor Protestant floundering to find any way to accurately represent the official teaching of the RCC denomination on this issue.
Absent such authority, we are left to rummage through our encounters with various commentators, blogs, and FR debatists to sort out the full tapestry of John 6 as Catholics understand it. One thing I can tell you from years of these debates is this, when pressed to explain why transubstantiation is essential to understanding this passage, I have never seen anyone produce workable evidence to that effect.
Put another way, the passage can be fully understood without special pleading for anything beyond an ordinary metaphor. What you need for a metaphor is two things. Something you want to represent, and a different thing you use to represent it. Juliet is lovely as a summer day. Indirect metaphor. Jesus is the door. Direct metaphor. But if the thing is itself both the thing to represent and the thing represented, it no longer qualifies as a metaphor. Basic Aristotelian logic. Something cannot be both A and Not A at the same time in the same way.
Therefore, attempting to reconcile medieval theories of substance and accidence with Jesus’ teaching in John 6 is doomed to failure. The Scriptural account uses two categories, physical and spiritual , to teach the meaning of the body and the blood of Christ. Aquinas invents a new category, real but not assignable to strictly physical or spiritual but not really a hybrid of the two either. I fear it is the sort of thing no one could ever accurately represent, even with the most sincere effort.
Most importantly, as I said, the scriptural message does not need the excess baggage to make sense on its own. Occams Razor, right? The least complex explanation that accounts for all the facts is the one most likely to be correct, and that is simply this, that Jesus’ listeners were hung up on how Jesus would feed their bellies, when what they should have been worrying about was coming to Jesus in faith to meet the deep needs of their starving, lost souls.
Peace,
SR
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P29.HTM
841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."330
Schmoozing up with islam IS a spirit of antichrist.
He's yours. You own him.
If you don't like what he represents, then that's YOUR problem.
So I’ve noticed.
I don't belong to a religion.
I belong to Christ, who put His seal on me in the form of the Holy spirit.
And no, I am not ashamed of Him.
Romans 1:16-17 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed--a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."
I figured as much. The "church" of Me. Do you commune with yourself also?
Heck, it leaves the Catholic floundering to support their own doctrinal claims.
Not the church of me.
The church, the body of Christ.
All believers who are united through the common bond of faith, partakers of Christ and the Holy Spirit.
THAT is our unity.
I attend services every week.
I see. So you preach unity in diversity. Interesting. And disturbing.
What "church"? Your dining room?
I belong to Christ. As such I am a member of the Ekklesia He began and is still building. The Church of Jesus is not an institution or org, it is a living Bride. ... Try it, you’ll like! And ... you will be born from above as a Christ ian, a member of GOD’s family.
So you refuse to answer to what “church” you attend “services”? Or is it really your own dining room?
As to the question you seem unable to ask, I walk with the Lord all day, every day, sometime disappointing Him, always thanking Him for yet another day. He is returning soon for His REAL Church, His Bride. He established the marriage covenant with His Bride the night before the crucifixion, breaking bread and serving a cup of wine, in alignment with Jewish ceremony, as one would expect should one seek to learn of Him.
When He does, you're in for a big surprise.
Where do you eat you meals? In your outhouse?
As are you.
“Give us something with fact, and not your unsubstantiated opinion. “
Below are two sets of purported scripture quotes (authorized versions notwithstanding). The first set is a collection of assurance passages. The second are other passages in the bible that will cause the prudent reader pause and examine his works.
The protestants fill your ears and eyes with almost exclusively assurance passages, then set themselves apart from Catholics by claiming “scripture alone”. That is hypocritical because what they really mean is “my key scriptures alone (don’t look too closely at the ones that obscure the assurance that I keep talking about)”
First some of the “Assurance” verses that YOU and others in this thread have posted:
Romans 10:9-11 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
9 For if thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thy heart that God hath raised him up from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For, with the heart, we believe unto justice; but, with the mouth, confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the scripture saith: Whosoever believeth in him, shall not be confounded.
Acts 16:30-31Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
30 And bringing them out, he said: Masters, what must I do, that I may be saved?
31 But they said: Believe in the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
It’s simple even rc’s can do it...just believe in what the Lord Jesus has already done and who He is and not what the church, mother, or saint didn’t do and you will be saved.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3509997/posts?page=716#716
mrobisr to Repent and Believe; daniel1212; metmom; boatbums; mrobisr; Elsie; MHGinTN; Mark17; BlueDragon
Contrast with some “Not-So-Sure” verses that others posted in an earlier thread
(http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2446097/posts):
James 2, 22-26: Seest thou how faith wrought with his works and by works was faith made perfect? etc.... so faith without works is dead also.
I Cor. 13, 1-3: Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels . . and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains . . . and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing
.
Matt. 7-21: Not every one that saith unto me, Lord Lord shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
In 1 Cor 13, St. Paul says, “Through it you are also being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you...”
MATTHEW 13:18-23 18”Listen then to what the parable of the sower means: 19When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is the seed sown along the path. 20The one who received the seed that fell on rocky places is the man who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. 21But since he has no root, he lasts only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, he quickly falls away.
From 2 Peter 1:
2 Grace to you and peace be accomplished in the knowledge of God and of Christ Jesus our Lord: 3 As all things of his divine power which appertain to life and godliness, are given us, through the knowledge of him who hath called us by his own proper glory and virtue. 4 By whom he hath given us most great and precious promises: that by these you may be made partakers of the divine nature: flying the corruption of that concupiscence which is in the world. 5 And you, employing all care, minister in your faith, virtue; and in virtue, knowledge; 6 And in knowledge, abstinence; and in abstinence, patience; and in patience, godliness; 7 And in godliness, love of brotherhood; and in love of brotherhood, charity. 8 For if these things be with you and abound, they will make you to be neither empty nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For he that hath not these things with him, is blind, and groping, having forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. 10 Wherefore, brethren, labour the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election. For doing these things, you shall not sin (*) at any time.
Matt 7:21-23 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity.
“But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments” (Matthew 19:16-17).
Context is lost on the Catholic.
I see. So you preach unity in diversity. Interesting. And disturbing.
With which statement you condemn Catholicism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Catholic_rites_and_churches
(Alexandrian:
Coptic Rite
Ethiopic Rite
Antiochian:
Maronite Rite
(West) Syrian Rite
Malankara Rite
Armenian Rite:
Armenian Rite
Chaldean or East Syrian:
Chaldean Rite
Syro-Malabar Rite
Byzantine Rite (Constantinopolitan):
Byzantine
Latin (Western) liturgical rites:
Roman Rite
Pre-Tridentine Mass (the various pre-1570 forms)
Tridentine Mass
Mass of Paul VI
Anglican Use
Ambrosian Rite
Rite of Braga
Mozarabic Rite
Catholic Order Rites (generally defunct):
Benedictine Rite
Carmelite Rite
Carthusian Rite
Cistercian Rite
Dominican Rite
Franciscan Rite
Friars Minor Capuchin Rite
Premonstratensian Rite
Servite Rite
Catholic autonomous particular Churches:
Latin Church with Latin liturgical traditions
Eastern Catholic Churches
Alexandrian liturgical tradition:
Coptic Catholic Church
Ethiopian Catholic Church
Eritrean Catholic Church
Antiochian liturgical tradition:
Maronite Church
Syrian Catholic Church
Syro-Malankara Catholic Church
Armenian liturgical tradition:
Armenian Catholic Church
Chaldean or East Syrian liturgical tradition:
Chaldean Catholic Church
Syro-Malabar Catholic Church
Byzantine liturgical tradition:
Albanian Byzantine Catholic Church
Belarusian Greek Catholic Church
Bulgarian Greek Catholic Church
Byzantine Church of Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro
Greek Byzantine Catholic Church
Hungarian Greek Catholic Church
Italo-Albanian Catholic Church
Macedonian Greek Catholic Church
Melkite Greek Catholic Church
Romanian Church United with Rome, Greek-Catholic
Russian Greek Catholic Church
Ruthenian Catholic Church
Slovak Greek Catholic Church
Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church)
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.