Catholic Canons of the Eucharist

[kensington]

I think he said he left the Catholic church and then the other day, went back.  So, now he is catholic again?   

I'm not sure how that works... Do you have to rejoin and re-everything, or do you just walk back in and you are good.   

I think my sil told me you have to go to confession, and do penance, and then you can return in right standing to take communion and all that.   

[James Rondon]

I interpret it differently then you and perhaps other Catholics as well, leave further questioning at that and call it good, move on and let there be peace.

You interpret what differently?... I would really like to hear your interpretation of "anathema", and the actual content of the canons mentioned in the OP. You are the one suggesting that this is merely a matter of differences in interpretation, yet, you have offered no interpretations of the canons in question... You can move on, if you wish, but running away from the truth doesn't make it go away.

[John 1:1]

When you are ready, if you decide that there might be merit in becoming a Catholic, when you decide that there are things this religion enjoys which delves into areas of scripture and the gospel your current one does not, I'll talk to you on this matter.  Until then, anything that I say to you will be facing opposition.

Let him that has eyes to see and ears to hear on this matter.

I see what Lee allows their staff to do clearly now, and since he's not stepping in and sits back and sais nothing, he must fully support your stance, your actions and your words, so they might as well come from his own lips at this point.  It's a shame really, because honestly I like the guy and only have been  trying to better his boards, making it frendly and inviting regardless of mainstream denomination, doing my best to help him keep this place cival in that regard.  I cannot do this if his staff refuses to comply with that, and in this case, making things worse and adding to the conflict.

Thank you for trampling the olive branch, I'll have to pray extra hard for you!

[John 1:1]

I guess that was a blast to me that was deleted, so I gotta add on or reinterate??

I spoke of the heritage we left behing, going from Jews to Christians right?

I'ts a hard thing, to be here, with faith in my lord, and still, even among my own perceived bretheren, now turned against me, I face nothing but scrutinyk!  I have nothing but remorse, warmth aloing your own individual understanding "all of us could use more of", and I am again slapped in the face for it.

I love God with all of my heart, all of my mind and all of my soul, that's all I gotta know, that's it period.........If we focused upon that, all of it, everything would be fixed, absoluytely everything!!!!

[kensington]

Yes John, I asked a few questions of you concerning your post.... and then, decided to just leave it between you and the mods you speak of. To stay out of it.  It was not a blast.  Not from my point of few.  I had questions. 

[Jimbob]

John 1:1, please don't take this the wrong way, and this particular remark has nothing to do with the other posters' remarks/responses to you.  You have made several statements about how the RCC teaches one thing, but you as Catholic (even though you also say you're not a Catholic at times) don't agree with and therefore people who are non-Catholic shouldn't have issues with Catholics.  Do you realize that no matter whether you are Catholic or not, you have absolutely no right to change the teachings of the Catholic Church, and that no matter what you say, the their doctrines cannot and do not change on your say so?  I ask you this, because it's a central tenet of the Catholic tradition.  You as an individual simply don't get to wave the hand and ignore Church teaching.  You cannot, for example, welcome to the eucharistic table someone the Church has said may not partake.  That freedom is not yours.  This makes me wonder if you comprehend the choice you have said you're making to unite yourself to the Catholic Church.  Your current practice of private interpretation is antithetical to your expressed desire to be Catholic.

[John 1:1]

Deleted for rules violations.

[Jimbob]

Apparently, we need yet another reminder.

Rule No. 1 - No "Flaming"

1.1 You may discuss another individual's beliefs or religious organization but you will not harass, insult, belittle, threaten, defame or flame the individual (member or nonmember) as this is considered personal attacks in posts, PMs and any other communication within this site. This includes, but is not limited to:
a. Directly calling another member "cultist,

[James Rondon]

John 1:1, please don't take this the wrong way, and this particular remark has nothing to do with the other posters' remarks/responses to you.  You have made several statements about how the RCC teaches one thing, but you as Catholic (even though you also say you're not a Catholic at times) don't agree with and therefore people who are non-Catholic shouldn't have issues with Catholics.  Do you realize that no matter whether you are Catholic or not, you have absolutely no right to change the teachings of the Catholic Church, and that no matter what you say, the their doctrines cannot and do not change on your say so?  I ask you this, because it's a central tenet of the Catholic tradition.  You as an individual simply don't get to wave the hand and ignore Church teaching.  You cannot, for example, welcome to the eucharistic table someone the Church has said may not partake.  That freedom is not yours.  This makes me wonder if you comprehend the choice you have said you're making to unite yourself to the Catholic Church.  Your current practice of private interpretation is antithetical to your expressed desire to be Catholic.

[James Rondon]

When you are ready, if you decide that there might be merit in becoming a Catholic, when you decide that there are things this religion enjoys which delves into areas of scripture and the gospel your current one does not, I'll talk to you on this matter.  Until then, anything that I say to you will be facing opposition.

Let him that has eyes to see and ears to hear on this matter.

Let him that says "that's your interpretation", actually offer his own interpretation of the canons in question.

I see what Lee allows their staff to do clearly now, and since he's not stepping in and sits back and sais nothing, he must fully support your stance, your actions and your words, so they might as well come from his own lips at this point.  It's a shame really, because honestly I like the guy and only have been  trying to better his boards, making it frendly and inviting regardless of mainstream denomination, doing my best to help him keep this place cival in that regard.  I cannot do this if his staff refuses to comply with that, and in this case, making things worse and adding to the conflict.

Yes, Lee allows his moderators to ask posters to back up their statements... Especially when a poster says that someone else has a "shotty" interpretation, and "twists words around", but then offers no interpretation of his own.

Thank you for trampling the olive branch, I'll have to pray extra hard for you!

While you are praying, please take the time to post your interpretation of "anathema", and the actual canons listed in the OP.

[John 1:1]

I sent Lee a PM, there will be changes made here, whether you like it or not, and you can keep selectively cencoring my posts, it's going to happen and it begins with demoting some of you moderators that are abusing their positions.

You are nothing for me to be held accontable for, especially on spiritual matters, for your's are lacking in too many areas for me to get through to you.  Deal with it!!!

[James Rondon]

I'm still waiting for your interpretations of "anathema", and the canons that were listed in the OP.

As to your most recent post, please condescend to me for a moment, and tell me how I am lacking when it comes to spiritual matters? Or is this, yet, another assertion on your part that will never be substantiated?

By the way, the moderators and administrator have been informed of your comments... I think you're right about changes being made here. I'm not so sure that you'll be happy with them, however.

[John 1:1]

2 Timothy 3, read it

[James Rondon]

You need to read Acts 8:23.

[James Rondon]

I'm still waiting for your interpretations of "anathema", and the canons that were listed in the OP.

As to your most recent post, please condescend to me for a moment, and tell me how I am lacking when it comes to spiritual matters? Or is this, yet, another assertion on your part that will never be substantiated?

By the way, I'm still waiting...

[John 1:1]

Stand in the light of Christ or leave

[kensington]

I sent Lee a PM, there will be changes made here, whether you like it or not, and you can keep selectively cencoring my posts, it's going to happen and it begins with demoting some of you moderators that are abusing their positions.

You are nothing for me to be held accontable for, especially on spiritual matters, for your's are lacking in too many areas for me to get through to you.  Deal with it!!!

Okay... now I am going to ask my questions again... WHAT are you talking about. Are you a spy for Lee?  How did you know Lee needed help to restructure his board.  Did Lee contact you and ask you to come here to do this thing you keep mentioning about taking over and the mods not complying?  What are you talking about?

I asked you these things last night, and decided to stay out of it... but you imply you are here to remake this site, that Lee needs you to get all things in line.  How did you know this thing?  Are they taking applications for Mods... or something. 

You keep implying that you are here to change this site... and fix it... but you can't tell us what is wrong with it, and what Lee and his mods are doing wrong. 

You said too, that you sent Lee a Pm... but you did not say that Lee is complying with you or your demands.  How do you know all of this... I find this so strange.

You never really do post any discussion or information to the topics you interrupt.  You just try to brow beat those in the topics demanding that we should just fall for the "Catholicism" thing without even being able to really explain it at all.  No one is going to just believe a doctrine contrary to the Word of God because someone says... "do it"...

I really think you do not understand the dogmas of the Catholic church, like so many of the masses of Catholics before you... you just followed it because you were told to, and it was what everyone you knew was doing.  Very few Catholics can meet the burden of explaining these questions asked in the OP that I have met.  They just can't. They go along with it because the church tells them to, or they say like you did... "I am Catholic, but I don't believe it".... 

[kensington]

Stand in the light of Christ or leave

What?  Who are you, and what have you don with Lee?  Do you have the right to demand people leave?

And if you did, would you not have that tiny little "Banned" button?  John.. are you really thinking about the things you say? 

I don't believe anyone here in this topic has been unChrist like to ask you to back up the statements of your faith with explanation or scripture... based on the OP to the topic, I really don't.  Maybe I am missing something.

[Charles Sloan]

Kensington,

You have missed absolutely nothing.

[kensington]

Oh... thank goodness! I was beginning to think that when I take time off to sleep... you all break out the balloons, call in a clown, have hot dogs, pizza and cake delivered and party ... then when I come back, everyone pretends nothing happened. 

I hate when that happens. 

[Bonnie]

Oh... thank goodness! I was beginning to think that when I take time off to sleep... you all break out the balloons, call in a clown, have hot dogs, pizza and cake delivered and party ... then when I come back, everyone pretends nothing happened. 

I hate when that happens. 

Sometimes I feel absolutely the same way.  LOL

[Bonnie]

So, I'm off topic      or am I in lieu of what happened.
I just wanted to remind everybody that in the heat of the battle we often forget who we're dealing with.  We can only see the ENEMY that made us mad.
I have a temper which I'm battling and trying my best with the help of the Lord to overcome.  So I know how you all feel. Those feelings are often justified at least to us they are.  But there's some babes and we have a tendency to forget that on these boards.  They walk away with some pretty deep wounds.  Some may never fully mend.
You pray for me and I'll pray for you - that we never inflict pain upon the little ones still growing on the milk.

God bless                 and   

[Jimbob]

To me, it's all a bit confusing.  On the one hand, you've got past church documents (some not so far back) calling pretty much all non-Catholic Christians "anathema" for some reason or another, and you have past statements all over the place that if you're not in the the One True Church, you are outside of salvation.  On the other hand, you have the past 30 years of more ecumenical language, and statements that make it seem they now view those outside the CC to be saved Christians (yet still unworthy of table fellowship).

So...it seems to me that they have painted themselves into a corner.  They haven't repudiated the old statements, and some I'm not sure they can and still hold credible their claims concerning the nature of the church, magisterium, and papacy, among other things.  But, they also cannot build credibility in areas of broader fellowship and continue to tell people they are just playing church (as they did with the Episcopals).  Because of this, when they make overtures of wanting to reach out, many in other groups who know what their unrepudiated teachings say are very suspicious; it's undermining their messages that are intended to reach out.  I see no way out of this corner until they are willing to say that the past teachings (which are still in effect) were just wrong.  Thus far, they've not been willing to go anywhere near that far.

[Harold]

Additionally, Anderson is not shy about proclaiming the fact that Scripture teaches that anti-Calvinists (i.e. Romanists, Pelagians, Arminians, Amyraldians, etc.), anti-paedobaptists, anti-regulativists, and a host of others that deny the apostolic faith (at points related to the doctrine, worship, government and discipline of the church), should be barred from the table of the Lord (arguing a fortiori from Math. 5:23-24); but, he is also careful to distinguish between the Popish and Prelatical views of excommunication (which equate excommunication with a sentence to hell) and the Calvinistic view which recognizes that those who are among the elect can at times come under the sentence of excommunication. For example, Greg Price has noted (in a forthcoming book on the visible church and separation) that "Calvin distinguishes between anathema and excommunication. The former sentences one to hell, the latter puts one outside the fellowship of the church" (cf. Calvin's Institutes 4.12.10). Samuel Rutherford makes the same distinction in his Survey of the Survey of that Summe of Church Discipline (1658) commenting on 1 Cor. 16:22 and 1 Cor. 5, as does James Fraser of Brae, on page 210, in The Lawfulness and Duty or Separation from Corrupt Ministers and Churches (1744).

http://www.swrb.com/newslett/actualNLs/calvincc.htm

Does this mean we all have to obey calvinist tenants, be excluded from the church, or burned at the stake.

FTL

[Charles Sloan]

What in the world does this topic have to do with Calvinism?

[Harold]

What in the world does this topic have to do with Calvinism?

The council of Trent was formed by the catholic church to defend their stance on doctrine as opposed to the doctrine of the reformers.

What does it have to do with the post, every group in the past made statements that would not be held to today. Calvinists said the same things in the same way, are they not just as guiltily as the RCC.

Is this the official stance of the catholic church today?

If so, then we can not be catholic. You don't agree with the council of Trent then don't join the catholic church.

FTL

Because of my beliefs I would not be welcomed at a Southern Baptist fellowship, but would be at a free-will baptist church.

[kensington]

I think you would really have to start another topic, and put up the dogmas of the "Calvinism" Communion so we could look and see if it does indeed say things that need discussed or not.

To this date, these declarations of the Catholic church stand concerning anyone taking communion and what they say.  Many many catholics seem to have missed this teaching and claim it is not so, or that they do not believe this way.. but as someone said before, if you do claim the Catholic Church as your Biblical authority, (and millions do)

This is the declaration of your faith against other believers....  and that is what we are discussing. 

Now, where does Calvinism come into play?  NO WHERE until you post their declarations of communion. Thanks.

[Harold]

I think you would really have to start another topic, and put up the dogmas of the "Calvinism" Communion so we could look and see if it does indeed say things that need discussed or not.

To this date, these declarations of the Catholic church stand concerning anyone taking communion and what they say.  Many many catholics seem to have missed this teaching and claim it is not so, or that they do not believe this way.. but as someone said before, if you do claim the Catholic Church as your Biblical authority, (and millions do)

This is the declaration of your faith against other believers....  and that is what we are discussing. 

Now, where does Calvinism come into play?  NO WHERE until you post their declarations of communion. Thanks.

If you claim to be a five point Calvinist, then all of the tenants of Calvinism apply?

In the 1500's they held the council of Trent, a lot has changed. I am not RC nor will I be, but why are we attacking them period?

FTL

[kensington]

No one is attacking them... We were trying to discuss and clarify what the true meaning and intent of these posted declarations are...  if you will direct your attention to the top of the page... to the left, you will see, we are in a forum called, "Theology".... and then, we are in a sub folder called "Organized Religion DISCUSSIONS"

Do you see a pattern evolving here? We are discussing the biblical merits of these Catholic declarations made by this organized relgion.

If you want to discuss Calvinism... I'm for that... post the dogmas, or doctrines of that organized religion, and lets see where it goes...

OR... you could simply post some discussion on the actual OP as per the topic....  That would be fun too.

If you have no opinion about what the posted dogmas imply.... then,  and If you think we are attacking anyone, and don't want to participate... I'd advise amscamming asap... so you don't fall into the temptation yourself.   

[kensington]

BTW... Attacking "Theology" on its biblical merit is not the same as attacking a person or persons on any level.

These posted declarations are actually "Antichrist" comments... It is the opposite or fake of what Christ would actually do and say.

I am not damned because I do not believe that a priest waves his hand over store bought wine and it becomes blood with DNA.  GOD can do that, God did turn water into wine...  Christ instituted communion. But, not in this manner...  It's wrong.  And considering that the "Organized Religion" that is called Catholic indeed declares such things, there is NO WONDER that we have a deep deep divide in the body of Christ...   

[kensington]

Harold, do you realize that your comments are demanding that we as posters clarify why we are participating in a forum that was place here for the specific purpose of discussion?

I think this was dealt with the past few days... if you think this discussion or topic has no merit and is misplaced or doesn't belong here, I think someone said to contact a mod. 

[Charles Sloan]

In the 1500's they held the council of Trent, a lot has changed. I am not RC nor will I be, but why are we attacking them period?

I don't believe anyone here is attacking the Roman Church per se, we are just attacking their doctrines.

But if you feel that strongly about it, you are always welcome to not read these threads.

[kensington]

Quote
Canon 4. If anyone says that after the consecration is completed, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are not in the admirable sacrament of the Eucharist,[45] but are there only <in usu>, while being taken and not before or after, and that in the hosts or consecrated particles which are reserved or which remain after communion, the true body of the Lord does not remain, let him be anathema.



This canon directly reveals the whorship of the Eucharist, or the recognition that once the ritual of transubstantiation is complete the Roman Catholic believes that the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus before and after the sacrament is taken. Some would try and compromise the unreasonable doctrine of transubstantiation, and confess that Jesus is only present "in usu" or while being taken. But this would result in them being anathema.

This is the reason you will see Catholics putting the wafer into the sunburst and then appear to whorship or "venerate" the wafer. Because according to these doctrines, that wafer has become God through transubstantiation.


Yes, there is a place a church here where we live, down in the city that has the elements on display in a glass case 24/7 and people come and go at all times during the day and night and worship the elements.  I have a friend who does, and my fil does.  It is called the "Church of the Adoration"... I think it is specific to this worship. 

Adoration in the Catholic Church is also applied to the act of worship before the Eucharist.

All other forms of showing respect would be more properly be called acts of veneration, such as the kissing of images of Jesus and the saints, and the cross on Good Friday.  Other gestures associated with adoration of the eucharist include: bowing, making the sign of the cross, and genuflection. (wikipedia)

[Charles Sloan]

And notice in canon 6 if you believe or say that such whorship is not to be practiced, or that you disagree particularly with the procession and custom of the Roman Church you are cursed of God.

Canon 6. If anyone says that in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, Christ, the only beotten Son of God, is not to be adored with the worship of <latria>,[47] also outwardly manifested, and is consequently neither to be venerated with a special festive solemnity, nor to be solemnly borne about in procession according to the laudable and universal rite and custom of holy Church, or is not to be set publicly before the people to be adored and that the adorers thereof are idolaters, let him be anathema.

They even acquiesce to the accusation of idolatry in their practices defense.

[kensington]

I wonder if I printed these out and took them to my Catholic family and asked them straight out if they thought I was damned, knowing I have openly stated my faith beliefs.. they would faint. 

They certainly would be shocked I asked them...