Eucharistic Grace

[jezic]

As Catholics we believe there is a special grace granted by the Eucharist that is inherent after the Consecration.

If a non-Catholic receives our Eucharist under any circumstance is that grace denied to them? Can the Church truely say that only people that understand (Catholics) can receive? Why then does it not discriminate against the members of its own faith that do not understand?

can anyone offer some guidance in this area. Right now i am not sure anything is really concrete. Is there an Apostalic letter that gives a reason why?

[thessalonian]

[quote name='jezic' date='Jan 17 2005, 09:56 PM'] As Catholics we believe there is a special grace granted by the Eucharist that is inherent after the Consecration.

If a non-Catholic receives our Eucharist under any circumstance is that grace denied to them? Can the Church truely say that only people that understand (Catholics) can receive? Why then does it not discriminate against the members of its own faith that do not understand?

can anyone offer some guidance in this area. Right now i am not sure anything is really concrete. Is there an Apostalic letter that gives a reason why? [/quote]
Good question and a spin that I have not heard before on it. First of all, one must consider 1 Cor 11 when speaking of whether the grace of the Eucharist is beneficial to the one who partakes.

[27]
Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.
[28] Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
[29] For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
[30] That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.
[31] But if we judged ourselves truly, we should not be judged.

This is essentially saying it is a sacralidge to partake of the Echarist in a state of mortal sin. From the perspective of Protestants partaking they do not have the normal means that A Catholic has of examining themselves before partaking. I.e. confessoin. It is not a matter of mercy that we ask them to refrain, not that they are all in mortal sin but that a submission to the sacrament of confession so that they can properly examine themselves is neccessary.

Also the Eucharist is a sacrament of unity, communion as it is called. It is a lie for someone to partake of the sacrament and yet deny tenants of the Church whether Protestant or Catholic. Partaking of the Lords supper implies submission to the Church he founded. Now God of course will judge if a Protestant is ignorant of these things. But it is prudent for the Church to do their best to keep them from recieving until they are submissive to the Church and they understand the sacrament.

It is not completely forbidden that Protestants recieve the Eucharist but only in very rare circumstances is it allowed. Canon law deals with this. I would have to look it up. But my understanding is that it requires approval of the local bishop and is when a Protestant who is open to the Church is near death or something like that.

Bottom line, it would be possible for a non-catholic to recieve the grace of the Eucharist in my understanding. But it is highly recommended that they not participate.

Here is an article from Catholic Answers that deals somewhat with your question.

[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/who_can_receive_communion.asp"]http://www.catholic.com/library/who_can_re...e_communion.asp[/url]

Good question. God bless

God bless

[thessalonian]

Here is the canon that deals with it:

"If the danger of death is present or other grave necessity, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or the conference of bishops, Catholic ministers may licitly administer these sacraments to other Christians who do not have full Communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and on their own ask for it, provided they manifest Catholic faith in these sacraments and are properly disposed" (CIC 844 § 4).

Hope that helps.

[jezic]

I just don't quite understand in this case now.

You talked about the mortal sin part and yes that makes some sense but truly are any of us really ready to receive it? Even the pope is a sinner. We cannot hope that we are able to receive it by anything we did.

Christ founded a church yes. I don't know that it was the "Catholic" church. The Catholic Church of today is the one true church. It is the fullness of the truth of God on earth. Christ founded the way to Heaven essentially. He did not say characterize yourself by a set of beliefs. Hold your tradition forever and meet together to worship my father through Me. He said make disciples of all nations. That is part of my misunderstanding here. Wasn't the true presence of Christ offered for everyone?? Did we all not receive it when he died? Did he not eat with sinners and tax collectors? He offered himself for them as well.

When did the Catholic church become so above everything else that others were refused the primary source of life on earth?

Who did the early Apostles share the remembrance of the last supper with? I assure you it was not only Christians. Was that not the Eucharist?

I don't mean to sound so mean or doubting here this just seems to be a major thing. I don't see how the church can set herself up as judge under any circumstances. ( There is the whole Peter and the keys of Heaven thing. That would allude to judgement but i don't know how that works.)

[thessalonian]

This thread is sounding a bit like debate but I ask the moderators indulgence as I don't want it over where the peanut gallery can chime in and confuse this young man more.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='jezic' date='Jan 18 2005, 12:09 AM'] I just don't quite understand in this case now.

You talked about the mortal sin part and yes that makes some sense but truly are any of us really ready to receive it? Even the pope is a sinner. We cannot hope that we are able to receive it by anything we did.

Christ founded a church yes. I don't know that it was the "Catholic" church. The Catholic Church of today is the one true church. It is the fullness of the truth of God on earth. Christ founded the way to Heaven essentially. He did not say characterize yourself by a set of beliefs. Hold your tradition forever and meet together to worship my father through Me. He said make disciples of all nations. That is part of my misunderstanding here. Wasn't the true presence of Christ offered for everyone?? Did we all not receive it when he died? Did he not eat with sinners and tax collectors? He offered himself for them as well.

When did the Catholic church become so above everything else that others were refused the primary source of life on earth?

Who did the early Apostles share the remembrance of the last supper with? I assure you it was not only Christians. Was that not the Eucharist?

I don't mean to sound so mean or doubting here this just seems to be a major thing. I don't see how the church can set herself up as judge under any circumstances. ( There is the whole Peter and the keys of Heaven thing. That would allude to judgement but i don't know how that works.) [/quote]
First of all it is good to ask questions and I don't mind trying to help you understand.

Are any of us ready to recieve? Recieving in mortal sin is a sacralidge and in that state we are not ready to recieve. No. The Eucharist washes away venial sin, and gives us strength against further mortal sin and so we must recieve. Worthy, not really. None of us are but God in his goodness and mercy has called us to recieve him and has given us the means to do so.

"Christ founded the way to Heaven essentially. He did not say characterize yourself by a set of beliefs. "

He didn't? That is what the whole new testament is about. Matt 16:18 and the office of the papacy. Matt 18 and Acts 15 and the authority of councils. John 6, Matt 26 and much more with regard to the Lord's Supper being the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ. Matt 16 he says "I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH" not Churches. Many Protestants reject baptismal regeneration, yet it is so clear in scripture and Church history. No the Church that Christ was establishing is the same Church that is the fullness of the truth today. You need to understand this. It is important to submit to her and trust her (Heb 13:17 obey and submit to your leaders who have concern for your soul").

Yes, Christ ate with tax collectors and Prostitutes but he called them to repentence. It is offered to everyone but only if they are willing to submit to the authority of Christ and his Church.The Church calls us to repentence. I am a tax collector in some of the things I have done but I have left those things behind. The Church a judge? Yes, it is. Please read 1 Cor 5, 6 and Matt 18. It is quite clear that is what the Church is to be.


"When did the Catholic church become so above everything else that others were refused the primary source of life on earth?"

Peter, thou are rock and upon this rock I will build my CHURCH and the GATES OF HELL SHALL NOT PREVAIL. President Bush is the president of the United States and so you pay your taxes and follow the laws that he signs. Would you ever ask well by what authority is he signing these things. Well it happens to be in a document written over 200 years ago by men. How much more should we submit to Christ's words and his Church and the promise that the gates of hell would not prevail against it. Next he says "I give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven (the Eucharist is a part of this) WHATEVER you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.". Note it says WHATEVER. Binding and loosing in heaven is pretty ominus with regard to these words but we know also that the Holy Spirit guides this office so that it does not bind and loose outside of God's will.


"Who did the early Apostles share the remembrance of the last supper with? I assure you it was not only Christians. Was that not the Eucharist?"

Do you have any evidence of this. I only see those who followed Jesus in Matt 26. Those in John 6 who did not believe in the true prescence turned and walked away.

It is fine to question but be sure you give the Church a chance to respond on these things. I have had many questions myself and still do. In time, if you pray and trust God will give you the answers. I will and have prayed for you.

Please read 1 Cor 5 and 6 if you do not think the Church is in a place of judgement along with Matt 18.

I will try to provide more later.

[jezic]

For the record. We are not debating. This is apologetics specifically. Just apologetics to a Catholic who has questions right now. I am really not so confused i just want to understand why it is like this. I believe the stuff you are saying i am just questioning why it is that way right now because of an event at a Mass this week.

[jezic]

President Bush is not a good example. I don't like american government. We won't start there.

The thing was i wanted to use a word to mean just the Roman Catholic Church not the Protestant ones. I wanted to point more towards the fact he basically said follow him which [b]was[/b] and is the Roman Catholic church. He did not say build the Roman Catholic Church though. So we agree there.

Are Protestants not called to repentance?

The church judging thing i got after i wrote before.

I wrote your argument on the next point after my comment.

You provided enough.

My point was when did the Church start separating people who believed everything from people who didn't? Is it so impossible to consider that the disciples at with people who weren't yet Christians?

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='Jan 18 2005, 09:36 AM'] This thread is sounding a bit like debate but I ask the moderators indulgence as I don't want it over where the peanut gallery can chime in and confuse this young man more. [/quote]
since he is asking honest questions w/ the genuine intent to learn, there is nothing in his posts that would cause me to close this thread. carry on, w/ the intent to teach and to learn.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='jezic' date='Jan 18 2005, 02:22 PM'] President Bush is not a good example. I don't like american government. We won't start there.

The thing was i wanted to use a word to mean just the Roman Catholic Church not the Protestant ones. I wanted to point more towards the fact he basically said follow him which [b]was[/b] and is the Roman Catholic church. He did not say build the Roman Catholic Church though. So we agree there.

Are Protestants not called to repentance?

The church judging thing i got after i wrote before.

I wrote your argument on the next point after my comment.

You provided enough.

My point was when did the Church start separating people who believed everything from people who didn't? Is it so impossible to consider that the disciples at with people who weren't yet Christians? [/quote]
The point is there are legitimate authorities and governments. How much more should there be legitimate authorities in religion and the Bible clearly indicates that there is. I have many more verses: 1 jer 3:15, "I will give you shepherds after my own heart who will give you knowledge and understanding".

I ma not quite sure what you mean about building a Church. He said on this Rock( which was Peter, succession is not hard to show either, i.e. starting with "i give you the keys..." keys indicate succession. If I buy a house I get keys which give me control, access and authority. I can delegate control access and authority by giving my wife and kids copies. If I sell the house I pass them on to the next owner. So I would disagree that he said build the Roman Catholic Church. If it is his Church he did in fact say build it. It is build by gaining membership which builds a living temple.

Eph 2:[19] So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,
[20] built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,
[21] in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord;
[22] in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.


Protestants are certainly called to repentence by God. They do not submit to the means God has entrusted to his Church and therin lies the problem. Do they repent? Most certainly some do. God is not limited by his sacraments. But they are not fully unified with the Church in this matter. Therefore, whether in ignorance or not, they are not fully submitting to Christ.

The Protestant Churches are offshoots of Catholicism. The Catholic Church did not divide them off. There early leaders choose division, rejecting the truths of the faith. God will be thier judge and he will be the judge of Protestants today. I believe those today are far less culpable than Luther for instance. The Church it seems to me has been very leanient with regard to excommunicating those who reject Church teaching. It is only when the rebellion becomes blatant and the rejection of doctrine becomes willfull and scandalous that it has acted. Luther tagged his 96 thesis on Wittenburg chappel for crying out loud. There comes a time when the Church must act for the good of the unity of those members who do submit.

" Is it so impossible to consider that the disciples at with people who weren't yet Christians?"


Could you rephrase this please. Once again I see no evidence in scripture that anyone recieved the Eucharist who had not recieved at least John's baptism. Did they all have full theological understanding. No. And members of the Catholic faith very greatly with regard to theological understanding today. That is fine. The difference is with regard to those whom are visibly separated from the Church. Part of the scandal caused by allowing them to partake is that it would degrade the meaning of the sacrament as one of unity.

Perhaps a part of your poblem is where Jesus says "unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life within you". One thing that I will say about this verse is there are 4 groups involved in that chapter. The Apostles whom say "to whom shall we go, you have the words of eternal life", the Jews who rejected the words and said "how can he give us his flesh to eat", the disciples who rejected it and turned and walked away (John 6v. 66). But there is another group of whom we can speak about this verse. Can you guess who???



Jepordy music.



The ones who were not there and did not hear the words. Perhaps they heard parts of them later and didn't hear the whole discourse from someone who was there and only remembered part of it. Or they hear it imperfectly today. Of these we can make no judgement. I do not believe that all who do not recieve the Eucharist end up in hell. They may, and if they do God will help us to understand. But I trust in his mercy as much as I do his justice.

Hope that helps.

God bless

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='jezic' date='Jan 18 2005, 12:09 AM'] I just don't quite understand in this case now.

You talked about the mortal sin part and yes that makes some sense but truly are any of us really ready to receive it? Even the pope is a sinner. We cannot hope that we are able to receive it by anything we did. [/quote]
well, i think you have to understand the distinction between being worthy and having a relationship with him. we can have a relationship with him and still not be worthy. none of us are worthy of ANY of the graces that he bestows upon us in ANY way. but, we can still be in a relationship with him. as long as we are maintaining this relationship--despite our unworthiness--we can receive the graces he wishes to give us thru the sacraments.

earlier you said, "Why then does it not discriminate against the members of its own faith that do not understand?" well, i think she does. for example, some bishops decided that they would not give Kerry communion if he came to their churches, b/c Kerry had made it explicitly known that he was not in communion w/ the Church. you can't receive Communion if you aren't in communion but, in the majority of cases, the church assumes that the person who comes for confession is knowledgable and in right relationship with God. this is b/c much more often than not, a person's separation from God is not as explicit as Kerry's was. it is up to each individual to discern if they are still in relationship with God. and only God knows what is deep w/in the hearts of men (unless you have a supernatural gift, like Padre Pio!). so, the church does discriminate amongst her members when she can, and she refrains when she can't.


[quote]Christ founded a church yes. I don't know that it was the "Catholic" church. The Catholic Church of today is the one true church. It is the fullness of the truth of God on earth.[/quote]
right, but do you know why this is? let me tell you: the fundamental reason why the Catholic Church is the "one true church" is for the very reason that it contains and protects the one sacred deposit of truth given first to the apostles by Jesus Christ himself. couple this w/ the many examples in which Jesus is indeed building a Church w/ a specific structure (a master w/ a key, upon which "i will build my CHURCH", w/ bishops, priests, and deacons) and it is quite evident to me that Jesus did set out to build a church.................and the Catholic Church is that Church.


[quote]Christ founded the way to Heaven essentially. He did not say characterize yourself by a set of beliefs. Hold your tradition forever and meet together to worship my father through Me. He said make disciples of all nations.[/quote]
you're right, he did found a way to heaven and he did command us to make disciples.

but, he DID also tell us to characterize ourselves w/ a certain set of beliefs:

[b]Mat 16:11-12[/b]
[b]11 [/b]"How is it that you fail to perceive that I did not speak about bread? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sad'ducees."
[b]12 [/b]Then they understood that he did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sad'ducees.

[b]Mat 18:17-18[/b]
[b]17 [/b]"If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
[b]18 [/b]Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

[b]John 4:24 [/b]"God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."

[b]John 8:31-32[/b]
[b]31 [/b]Jesus then said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples,
[b]32 [/b]and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."

[b]John 14:15-17[/b]
[b]15 [/b]"If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
[b]16 [/b]And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you for ever,
[b]17 [/b]even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells with you, and will be in you.


.....and he DID tell us to hold to our tradition:

[b]Mark 13:31 [/b]Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.

[b]Luke 10:16 [/b]"He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me."

[b]John 18:21 [/b]"Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard me, what I said to them; they know what I said."


.....and he DID tell us to worship his father together:

[b]Mat 6:9[/b] Pray then like this: [i]Our[/i] Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.

[b]John 4:23[/b] But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him.


we must acknowledge these things when we look at the life of Christ and determine what he has intended to do.


[quote]That is part of my misunderstanding here. Wasn't the true presence of Christ offered for everyone?? Did we all not receive it when he died? Did he not eat with sinners and tax collectors? He offered himself for them as well.[/quote]
it was indeed offered to everyone! but, the fact is, protestants have knowingly and willingly separated themselves from the communion to which his Presence is offered. too often people approach this topic as if the Church is withholding Jesus from people. but, the fact is, they have CHOSEN not to receive him by separating themselves from Him. they can't then hope to receive him and still be separate from Him! The Real Presence of Jesus Christ IS for all...................all who will commune with him.


[quote]When did the Catholic church become so above everything else that others were refused the primary source of life on earth?[/quote]
i in turn ask you: when did WE become so above the Church that we can determine for ourselves the truth, and how the Church should act, and what she should teach? the church is "the pillar and foundation of the truth" ([b]1 Tim 3:15[/b]). of course she is above the judgments of men!


[quote]Who did the early Apostles share the remembrance of the last supper with? I assure you it was not only Christians. Was that not the Eucharist?[/quote]
as thessalonian said, those who shared the Last Supper were those who believed what Jesus taught about it and did not walk away from that which was hard to accept:

[b]John 6:60,66[/b]
[b]60 [/b]Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, "This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?"
[b]66 [/b]After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him.

this is an important point: those who shared in the Last Supper were those who believed what Jesus taught about it. and so it is today. it must be this way, "For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself" ([b]1 Cor 11:29[/b]).


[quote]I don't mean to sound so mean or doubting here this just seems to be a major thing. I don't see how the church can set herself up as judge under any circumstances. ( There is the whole Peter and the keys of Heaven thing. That would allude to judgement but i don't know how that works.)[/quote]
hopefully i have helped to somewhat set your mind at ease. thank you for your honest questions.

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[jezic]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='Jan 18 2005, 03:18 PM'] The point is there are legitimate authorities and governments. How much more should there be legitimate authorities in religion and the Bible clearly indicates that there is. I have many more verses: 1 jer 3:15, "I will give you shepherds after my own heart who will give you knowledge and understanding".

I ma not quite sure what you mean about building a Church. He said on this Rock( which was Peter, succession is not hard to show either, i.e. starting with "i give you the keys..." keys indicate succession. If I buy a house I get keys which give me control, access and authority. I can delegate control access and authority by giving my wife and kids copies. If I sell the house I pass them on to the next owner. So I would disagree that he said build the Roman Catholic Church. If it is his Church he did in fact say build it. It is build by gaining membership which builds a living temple.

Eph 2:[19] So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,
[20] built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,
[21] in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord;
[22] in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.


Protestants are certainly called to repentence by God. They do not submit to the means God has entrusted to his Church and therin lies the problem. Do they repent? Most certainly some do. God is not limited by his sacraments. But they are not fully unified with the Church in this matter. Therefore, whether in ignorance or not, they are not fully submitting to Christ.

The Protestant Churches are offshoots of Catholicism. The Catholic Church did not divide them off. There early leaders choose division, rejecting the truths of the faith. God will be thier judge and he will be the judge of Protestants today. I believe those today are far less culpable than Luther for instance. The Church it seems to me has been very leanient with regard to excommunicating those who reject Church teaching. It is only when the rebellion becomes blatant and the rejection of doctrine becomes willfull and scandalous that it has acted. Luther tagged his 96 thesis on Wittenburg chappel for crying out loud. There comes a time when the Church must act for the good of the unity of those members who do submit.

" Is it so impossible to consider that the disciples at with people who weren't yet Christians?"


Could you rephrase this please. Once again I see no evidence in scripture that anyone recieved the Eucharist who had not recieved at least John's baptism. Did they all have full theological understanding. No. And members of the Catholic faith very greatly with regard to theological understanding today. That is fine. The difference is with regard to those whom are visibly separated from the Church. Part of the scandal caused by allowing them to partake is that it would degrade the meaning of the sacrament as one of unity.

Perhaps a part of your poblem is where Jesus says "unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life within you". One thing that I will say about this verse is there are 4 groups involved in that chapter. The Apostles whom say "to whom shall we go, you have the words of eternal life", the Jews who rejected the words and said "how can he give us his flesh to eat", the disciples who rejected it and turned and walked away (John 6v. 66). But there is another group of whom we can speak about this verse. Can you guess who???



Jepordy music.



The ones who were not there and did not hear the words. Perhaps they heard parts of them later and didn't hear the whole discourse from someone who was there and only remembered part of it. Or they hear it imperfectly today. Of these we can make no judgement. I do not believe that all who do not recieve the Eucharist end up in hell. They may, and if they do God will help us to understand. But I trust in his mercy as much as I do his justice.

Hope that helps.

God bless [/quote]
I hadn't looked at scripture yet. I find that almost any time i need something really bad i am shown something that i wanted before. God just chuckles a little bit.

There is a lot of evidence for the authority of the church. I understand that. I accept that as well though i am a little cautious of the material from the later parts of the Gospels and the new testament, not because it isn't true or the word of God. It is both of those. It was written by the early church though. So they understood that to be what Christ meant.

i gtg for now.

later i will finish my thought.

[jezic]

I understand much of what you say as well.

I don't know now what train of thought i was thinking about before.

I do not think that we are above the church at all. We are not deciding anything. I am not trying to tell the church what to do. It is the other way around. They tell me and i listen. I wonder why it is that way.

Many of today's protestants have not chosen to be separate from the Catholic church which is sad. They just follow their parents. Some do and i do not speak about those. It just seems wrong to me that the Catholic church has taken a sacrament for all and made it a sacrament for many fewer people.

I also understand the strong scripture basis for this or at least the ones that you point out. Surely there is more than that as well. My only thoughts there are this is one way of looking at a block of text. THere are others, be they right or wrong. This is the authoritative interpretation of the church and so it is also mine.

You used a perfect example of a Catholic and the Eucharist and you are right he was denied. He was a prominent public figure and that is likely why his view was known. I just wonder about all of those that are private John Kerrys.

I just wonder how "being catholic" is the qualification to receive Christ on earth. I understand that it means so much more than those two words. I just think it is a sad division of our times.

I pray for the day when we can share that meal together will all of our brothers and sisters around the world.

[thessalonian]

"I pray for the day when we can share that meal together will all of our brothers and sisters around the world."

Amen.

Your post shows a heartfelt desire for protestants to be with us in heaven. I sense true love for Protestant people and that is good. Don't let it mold your truth to where it separates you from the truth in indifferentism or relativism and you will be fine. Pray for them and gently lead them toward the Church, knowing that God is merciful and also that he is responsible for the grace that will bring them to it. Each man is responsible for the light he has been given. We cannot know the grace and light that God has given each man. Trust in his mercy. Thanks for the questions.

Blessings

[jezic]

i should thank you for the answers. I think i understand a little better now.

I don't really understand why it has to be that way. That is part of trusting in the whole divine plan for salvation though.

I love the protestants but don't get me wrong, many times i simply look to their take on our rituals and other stuff for perspective or so we can better explain it to them when the time is right. I hold the church's opinion in the highest regard.

I am happy you were able to do the research, i am kinda strange, but somehow simple words convey these complex concepts to me much more than when i dig for them through scripture and the Catechism. So i will stick as much as i can to a simple little path and let you guys deal with the heavy stuff. Maybe when i know more i will move beyond that. until then .... well God likes simple people.