Would You..."take -communion-" Elsewhere?

[Muschi]

Soujorner-

Take heart! I myself am a fairly new "convert" to the Catholic Faith. (almost 2 years now). I also, am the only Catholic in my family. (kinda weird since our family ancestors were catholic). I have no problem with not receiving communion in a Protestant Church for all of the reasons mentioned in previous posts.

If I were to receive Communion in a Protestant Church, I would be guilty of lying because I would basically be saying, "Yeah! I agree with you guys, amen!"

THAT is why we don't share Communion with Protestants, Bruce. It is also an act of love on the part of the Catholic Church that She does not allow Protestants under most circumstances to receive Communion in any of Her Churches. Why is it an act of love? It prevents you or any other Protestant from "desecrating" the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ and/or making a mockery out of Him and His teachings since you don't agree with the Catholic Church's teachings. I Corinthians 11:23-30. This is how the CATHOLIC Church understands Communion that is to say we believe the bread and wine at the time of consecration become the Real Body and Blood of Christ for us to be nourished spiritually AND physically.

Since Protestants don't agree, why would you want to receive Communion (sharing) in that which you disagree Hope this helps clarify without offending.

It's in how we interpret the Scriptures and authority. - God bless! - Muschi

[Truth]

Hello all,

I have a question and a statement.

Question are all Christian brother and sister in Christ Jesus?

If the answer is yes, there is only one Christ and one body and one blood.

If you can't not share in the same body and blood you are not in the body of Christ and not be protected by its blood.

Furthermore, its only one gospel and if you are following another be it from man or angle _____________________________________________. Fill in the blanks.

Please go to Galatians and read the book from front to back after you put you answer on the site. God have a message for you.....

Peace be to you all, in the name of Jesus.

[Anna]

I think this brings us back to an earlier thread with Circle Master when we discussed the meaning of "unity."

Protestants think that "unity" means fellowship. They feel that communion is a celebration of their fellowship in loving the Lord.

That isn't what the Church has historically taught about "unity," and that isn't what the Church has historically taught about "Communion."

Holy Communion is a Sacrament of Unity.

When we eat Christ's Body and drink His Blood, we are all mystically united and become One Body in Christ.

We abide in Him, and He abides in us.

Our unity is not a matter of "everybody getting along together," as in fellowship.

Ours is a unity in beliefs with the entire Church, from 33 A.D. to present. It is our unity under the Holy Father and the bishops throughout the world. It is our unity with the Apostles, the Blessed Mother, and all the Catholics who've gone before us.

We are totally united in our One Faith, One baptism, and One Lord. This is pledged, put into action, and consummated when we consume the Sacred Host. It is like the marriage feast between the Lord and His Bride.

It's a Sacred ritual that protestants either don't fully understand and appreciate, or that they outright reject.

So, it would be a mockery for a Catholic to go to a protestant church and partake of crackers and grape juice, acting as if there is a unity there, because it would all just be an act. There would be nothing real or true about it, no matter how much we may like these people. We are not united in belief, and they are not partaking of the Body and Blood of Jesus. So the entire exercise would be a farse...What is it they call the Mass? An empty ritual? Uh, yeah, it would be an empty ritual for a Catholic to eat crackers and grape juice just to make his friends happy.

Pax Christi. <><

[Brother Adam]

Brother Adam,

I wonder if Baptist churches in the UK are different to the US and Australia since there was never a problem about taking communion in Methodist or Anglican churches, just a major issue with my Anglican baptism being regarded as invalid. I was also allowed to take communion in the Baptist church before I had a full immersion baptism! That seems odd now given that communion is regarded as being in communion with all the church believes - I had understood it to be a symbolic act of remembrance of the Last Supper and therefore open to all Christians.

It sure sounds like they are different, then again, it depends on what sect of the Baptist Church you belong to. For instance, our church belongs to the GARBC- General Association of Regular Baptist Churches. There is also the American Baptist Church (Baptist in name only), The Fundamental Baptist Churches, the Primative Baptist Churches, and so on.

I believe closed communion is required of many churches, becuase the belief of what communion is differs. Since communion is still taken seriously in protestant churches, though lacking the Catholic understanding, protestant churches want to be sure they are in tune with scripture that declares if one takes communion unworthily, they take it to their damnation. Thus, it is part of being cautiuos. Most closed communion churches ask if you are not of that denomination you do not take communion, but usually don't come up and ask you before the service, if you do go up and take it, its on you.

[BLAZEr]

Just a little topic. But one that will illuminated a very important point.

Catholics.

If you were visiting a friend, and he took you to his Protestant church, would you take "Communion" if they offered it that day?

And if you did, would you think you had "Partaken in a VALID" ceremony?

And if NO, why not?

I wouldn't take it for a million dollars. Or for that matter, any amount of money. I wouldn't take it if my life was at stake. It would be a blasphemy for me to take. I know better.

Now, if it were a Greek Orthodox church and I couldn't reasonably make it to a Catholic Church . .. well, sure.

[Bruce S]

"Take and eat"... "Do THIS in remembrance of Me..."

WHERE isn't specified.

It is a command to DO.

The words, players, the location...were NEVER meant to LIMIT.

Using communion to CONTROL men is a sin.

Edited January 27, 2004 by Bruce S

[Paladin D]

"Take and eat"... "Do THIS in remembrance of Me..."

WHERE isn't specified.

It is a command to DO.

The words, players, the location...were NEVER meant to LIMIT.

Using communion to CONTROL men is a sin.

Consuming Jesus Christ by partaking in a mockery of the Eucharist, is a sin.

[Bruce S]

Consuming Jesus Christ by partaking in a mockery of the Eucharist, is a sin.

Again. Denominational PRIDE raises it's ugly head. Not one Christian MOCKS Christ by following His instruction set, not one.

Pray.

[Paladin D]

Again. Denominational PRIDE raises it's ugly head.

If that's your assumption, so be it.

Not one Christian MOCKS Christ by following His instruction set, not one.

If that Christian is following Christ's instruction.

Pray.

Always do.

[Jake Huether]

"Take and eat"... "Do THIS in remembrance of Me..."

WHERE isn't specified.

It is a command to DO.

The words, players, the location...were NEVER meant to LIMIT.

Using communion to CONTROL men is a sin.

Bruce, have you even read the Bible...

The words, players, the location...were NEVER meant to LIMIT.

Acording to who??

Is that Biblical? Or is that your interpritation?

You're right to an extent. They were never MEANT to limit. But since silly humans think they know better how to start a religion than God himself, they limited themselves.

Up until the "reform" it wasn't really limited, you see. If you were Christian, you were Catholic, and since you were Catholic (i.e. Universal in faith) you weren't limited.

Christ didn't set the limit. Therefore you won't find that limit in the Bible. Humans limited themselves by breaking unity with Christs Church.

St. Paul stated that we must be ONE! Protestants aren't ONE with us, because they don't want to be. (uh, that's what PROTESTant means).

You won't find the Apostles saying, "Take, eat, unless you are Protestant" because there was no such thing. Obviously if you were a Pagan you couldn't recieve. And from St. Pauls letter to the Corinths we see that one must be "prepared" to recieve the Eucharist, lest one risk damnation. So, ask yourself what Paul meant when he warned about being "prepared"? Did it include believing all that he Taught, all that Christ's Church Taught? I think you'll find the answer to be YES. In order to recieve the Eucharist one couldn't simply be "in a state of grace", but also in UNION with the Church. Why partake in Communion when you have no intention to be in communion with that Church.

[Bruce S]

Why partake in Communion when you have no intention to be in communion with that Church.

THAT CHURCH?

My point exactly. We are part of Christ, not THAT CHURCH or THIS CHURCH, in communion with The Lord.

Partake and pray.

Won't send you to hell, won't even get you five more minutes in Purgagory.

[cmotherofpirl]

He who eats or drinks unworthily Bruce. If you get up and recieve communion and pretend unity where none exists - you are lying to God, giving scandal and committing a mortal sin, thus condemning yourself.

If you recieve Communion in a Catholic Church you are publically proclaiming your allegience to all the teachings of the Church. THe same goes if you do it anywhere else.

[Bruce S]

If you recieve Communion in a Catholic Church you are publically proclaiming your allegience to all the teachings of the Church. THe same goes if you do it anywhere else.

oh my goodness (don&#39;t blasphemy).

That is EXACTLY what Paul said about those who wanted to have "some of the Law" the circumcision party as it were.

He warned. If you WANT the LAW live UNDER the Law.

He then roundly condemned that line of thought, and said that we escaped the SLAVERY of the Law and ritual, why would one want to go there again?

Honestly, gang.

Please go read Romans, and put in the Word CATHOLIC in every instance where JEW is written, put in THE RULE IS everywhere the word LAW is mentioned.

The parallels are honesty frightening, and damning at the very same time.

We ESCAPED guys, we have GRACE NOW, we are NOT obligated to religious leadership to control our every move, action, and ritual.

Thank you Paul.

I PERSONALLY will even call YOU, Paul, a SAINT NOW, and I never like doing that to dead Christians, but to me, if there ARE Saints, he most certainly is the one that I would pray TO, to INTERCEDE for you Judaisers with Catholic minds.

Bless you.

[Brother Adam]

The law refers to Jewish law as given by moses to the Jewish people. Let's not forget Christ was a Jew who came to first, save the Jewish people and second, save the gentiles. You don't get to play by your own rules. Salvation is still for the Jewish nation, praise God though, he also allows all other people to partake in that salvation. Your use of "law" is out of context.

Closed communion is there for a reason and scriptures say if you drink it unworthily you drink it to your damnation. Communion has never been used to control, but to free. No one is going to twist your arm behind your back, force you into a Catholic Church and make you take communion.

Edited January 27, 2004 by Brother Adam

[dUSt]

He then roundly condemned that line of thought, and said that we escaped the SLAVERY of the Law and ritual...

Where did he say this? I don't remember him saying anything about "ritual". Did you add that word yourself?