I just became a Eucharistic Minister and was told to deny communion to

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

NO ONE under any circumstances ever. Even if I knew they had just commited a grave sin.

Just saying.

[LittleApple81]

1. I guess your church has not gotten the meme from the White House

via the bishops.
Congratulations.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

2. Contrary to the popular dogma here at DU - it is a minority of clergy who

promote the foolish concept of denying communion to people.

But I wouldn't want to upset people who cling so tightly to their hatred of all things RC.

[Cheswick2.0]

4. it may be a minority that is true

However the fact that the RC preaches anti-choice every sunday is part of the problem we have politically.
As long as you have a top down authoritarian organization in which you have NO POWER to make change, other people need to speak up and tell the Pope and the right wing bishops to STFU when they get involved in my civil rights.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

7. The time will come when the more liberal elements will take control of

the Holy See. It will happen.

Man, JP II was such a liberal priest - what happened to him when he became Pontiff?

[Az]

13. Um... not for a while

You do know that JP II has been stacking the cardinals with conservative members. It is likely that the next pope is going to be even more conservative. I wish it were otherwise but the current pressures facing the vatican are such that as a defensive response they are likely to go conservative and attempt to force the society to follow suit rather than concede the issues.

[Cheswick2.0]

14. I hope you are correct C

Isn't the RC the largest christian denomination in the US? It does matter how the Pope governs.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

18. It does matter but mass rebellion lies around the corner if they get too

heavy handed.

That's just reality.

The Vatican does not want a modern day reformation.

[Az]

24. The big problem the Vatican faces in America

Is Roe V Wade and social attitude towards birth control and abortion. The Church is very very familiar with the effects social change can bring on their position. Having whethered many such changes. On many issues it may struggle but in the end it is able to concede as long as it has not drawn a line in the concrete (Papal infallibility).

Earth centered universe, evolution, and various other scientific discoveries were accepted in time because the pressure became overwhelming. And while they opposed the ideas in general concept they had not drawn the line in the sand.

But abortion and birth control were set in stone in the decree Humanae Vitae (1968). As an official decree of the Pope it placed the Vatican on a collision course with social change. The vatican cannot back away from this by decree. Yet society has come to see birth control as a right and was well on its way to accepting abortion as a right as well. Until the vatican stepped in.

The problem is that if Humanae Vitae is renounced the credibility of the vatican's claim to authority is undermined. Without that claim to authority the Holy See is rendered mundane. The Pope's opinion becomes just that. An opinion. No better than your's or my opinion. This cannot be.

Thus the Vatican has a very real interest in seeing that social reform brought forward by one of the most powerful nations on earth does not undermine their claim to moral authority. To this end a strong opponent of choice and birth control will be placed on the throne with the goal of bring the US under control.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

37. There is no solution to this for a very simple reason

The church has always spoken of "The World" vs "The Church". The church believes that just because society wants something or even demands it - if it is wrong (in their eyes, which they believe are God's eyes) its wrong period.

The key element missed here is that the church says that anyone - ANYONE can be saved, no matter what they have done. This, of course is not license to sin, but in the end God's love is the most powerful element.

Thus I, even after having been part of an abortion, can find my rest in heaven.

This battle between secular society and the Church will never end - that's the nature of it. In the end society will win. The Vatican would love nothing more than a thocratic world - it will not have one. But just because the Vatican believes these things does not mean that the church at large does.

[Az]

Yes society will win but in the mean time

The church and society will contend with each other and individuals will be ground between these gargatuans like grist in a mill. Society may win out in the end but in the meantime injustice and suffering shall flourish where society is not allowed to advance. There is nothing malicious in the churches actions. The suffering is merely consequences of the social struggle.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

60. Agreed AZ and very well put, as usual!

:toast:

[lazarus]

35. Isn't that the point?

I can't imagine a more authoritarian concept than doing the bidding of the representatives of an omnipotent and omniscient deity, who lays down laws seemingly on a whim.

Do Christians honestly believe Heaven will be run as a democracy? The logical end result of Christianity, Catholic or Protestant, is a complete and total dictatorship, with god at the top, everyone else on the bottom.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

91. Oh, for Pete's sake!

Are you honestly implying that a person who worships an abstract diety is more susceptible to accepting authoritarian control on a political level? It may suprise you to know that not everyone who considers himself a member of a Christian-based religion sees God as Charleton Heston in flowing robes throwing down lightning bolts from the sky. There are many different ways of viewing God, and many different ways of worshipping.

For example, a person may view God as pure goodness or the concept of goodness, and consider that to be a "servant of God" means to do as much good in the world as you can. Even Thomas Jefferson -- and I am well aware of the America-being-founded-as-a-"Christian-nation" canard and aware that Thomas Jefferson was closer to being a Deist than a Christian of that era -- but even Jefferson spoke of people being "endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights" in the Declaration of Independence. So it is arguable that the concept of God meant something to him on some level -- even as an abstract concept.

Even a person who views God and heaven in more traditional terms does not seem to me any more likely to accept an authoritarian government. You could just as easily argue that a person who accepts God as the one true supreme being and sees us all as "God's children" would be less likely to tolerate authoritarian heirarchies on earth. There have been many Christians in the world who have done much to fight oppression and oppose totalitarianism. Your generalizations are insulting to a huge segment of the world population.

And as far as the RC being authoritarian: while it may be true that decisions on Church policy and religious positions are made from the top down, there is no means of forcing those positions on anyone else. The Vatican can say whatever it wants. No Catholic in America or any other democratic country with separation of Church & State is forced to accept those views. And no Catholic is prevented from leaving the Church altogether if he/she so chooses.

[Dhalgren]

6. You are right, at least in my experience.

I am absolutely not a Christian, but I am well acquainted with several Catholic priests and lay people and they in no way support denying communion to anyone. Several of the priests are very liberal/progressive and I think that far too many people paint with far too broad of a brush. Thanks for sharing your church's position.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

10. Thanks for hearing me. Its hard to get a positive Catholic thread going

The Catholic church harbors some very liberal folk - think Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker. And Why not - ever read Acts of the Apostles? Sounds like socialism quite a bit.

There are many many people in the RC church and it is impossible to paint 1,000,000,000 people with the same brush.

[truthspeaker]

12. When those 1 billion people CHOOSE to accept the rulings of the Pope

We can indeed paint them with a broad brush.

[Az]

15. American Catholics are an odd bunch

There is a common saying heard amongst US Catholics. "The pope has his opinion and I have mine." What you will find is that the bulk of the conservativism within Catholicism comes from certain subsets of the clergy. They attempt to push the congregations back into a conservative mind set while many simply refuse to go.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

17. And a large portion of priests (especially those in holy orders) have a

different viewpoint than the Vatican.

I remember when I asked my priest about the letter the pope wrote about the Rosary recently. My priest said "Did he write it or one of his cronies?"

That doesn't mean he is rebellious it means he is a free thinker and that is a good thing.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

16. Oh come on - are you serious?

That's real convenient - very black and white.

Paint me however you want - you will be wrong when you do.

[Rich Hunt]

84. don't bother

If the US educational system were not so pitiful, these people would know that there is a history of paranoia and bigotry about so-called 'popery'.

Personally, I've given up getting angry about it and have decided to laugh to myself at their ignorance.

They're just doing exactly what their patrician forbears would want them to do.

Mayflower ahoy!

[Bridget Burke]

21. And your hero John Ashcroft will definitely agree.

After all, he received an honorary degree from Bob Jones University, following in the proud footsteps of Lester Maddox, Storm Thurmond, George Wallace & Ian Paisley.

I've noted that many ex-Protestants have a hard, cold, black & white, unforgivingly Calvinistic atheism. While I've perhaps "lost" my faith as well, I haven't become blind to the good in it. And I hope that the Church will continue to grow & change.



Wonderful icons here, including some quite unorthodox ones:

www.puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/andre/

[jukes]

28. Bridget Burke

devout atheist here, but i do appreciate art. that's a gorgeous picture in your sig. wd make a fine tat!

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

44. I think your icon and mine should go on a date!

It would be scandalous - a white female saint and a fiery black male saint! :)

[Quahog]

69. Thanks BB

Icon link is outstanding, I've added one as my new sig line. Think I'll order a signed print of this for my home as well. Remarkable work.

[Rich Hunt]

86. my sentiments, EXACTLY

'Calvinism' is exactly correct.

A lot of people are not aware of the pernicious legacy of puritanism on US culture - and this is particularly true of atheists. Talk to an atheist long enough and you can tell exactly what religion they were brought up in.

BTW, before any 'atheists' jump the gun - I am one myself. I just don't care to associate myself with certain types of evangelical, self-righteous atheists.

[jukes]

23. Chavez

i'm a compulsive xian-basher, but there is justice in your comments. i do believe it is only a determined, politicized minority of RC cadre that espouse denying the sacraments as a control device.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

43. I belong to the type of Catholic thought that the Catholic Workers espouse

A very socialist Acts of the Apostles inspired Christianity. One of acceptance forgiveness and above all humility - spiritual humility.

I also have been very impressed by the Vedantists who hold as a tenet that all religions, in their core, have the same goal - unitive knowledge of God. When one accepts this concept (A concept to which the Vatican has conceded even in their Cathechism) one finds more peace within the church's medieval mindset.

The Vatican is not the Church - the Vatican is of man and thus inherently flawed.

[iconoclastic cat]

19. Nice!

ChavezStT, your posts are a great example of the kind of critical analysis that we should apply to our own discourse. I dig it. Were you a linguistics major?

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

41. No - why, do I sound wordy?

I don't know exactly why but I feel well complimented!

:)

unless that was sarcasm.

Anyway - thanks
:toast:

[iconoclastic cat]

52. No, not sarcasm nor wordiness.

I meant your ability to analyze speech, avoid fallacies of logic, etc.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

64. Thank you very much

I try, I try!

Here's to you!

:toast:

[LittleApple81]

27. I don't HATE the RC church. Not enough time to hate. But I do

DISLIKE most religions because they get involved in gathering power for the church more than in helping those in need.
Many people need a church in their lives. The more power to them. But I don't want these churches to proselitize and try to eliminate other people's culture and beliefs.
AGAIN... it is not only the Catholic or other Christian churches that do this. The Muslim religion is VERY EFFECTIVE in this area.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

45. Very good point. Catholicism has a big target on its back in the US but

All the strict religions of the world employ the same sort of authoritarian techniques.

[No Passaran]

29. Because of that minority

I like to practice my religion on my own away from clergy. What gives someone a right to deny another human a Communion? Did God show up in their sleep to tell them this?

It's just what I always aid: No one will stand in the way between myself and God. I'm tired of people telling worshipers how God doesn't love them, you have to do this, you have to do that, while they go backstage and stuff their mattresses full of money. Total hypocrites.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

74. With crazed mullahs and Phelps/Chick/Army-of-God types around

Hating the RCC is a waste of time.

There's much to like about it. Effective charities, anti-war, ant-death-penalty, pro-poor positions.

[Kitka]

49. U.S. Counsel of Catholic Bishops…. June 15, 2004….

The Catholic community and the institutions which are a part of our family of faith should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not receive awards, special honors or prestigious platforms which would suggest support for their actions. However, we cannot cut off dialogue with public officials since they make decisions every day that touch issues of human life and dignity. We must remember that we will rarely persuade if we have no dialogue or cannot make our case.


We should not tell people how to vote or sanction voters. This is contrary to our teaching, may be a violation of the civil law, and is often counter-productive.....

.....Therefore, based on the traditional practice of the Church and our consultation with members of our conference, other episcopal conferences, distinguished canonists and theologians, our Task Force does not advocate the denial of Communion for Catholic politicians or Catholic voters in these circumstances.

http://www.usccb.org/bishops/intreflections.htm

[Lefta Dissenter]

3. Huh, Forgiveness...

what a concept. Or is it that we are not the ones to stand in judgment? (another novel concept)

If I ever start going to church, I'm finding yours to go to!

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

5. The concept is that WE are not to stand in judgement and forgiveness has

a big part to play there. The act of communion is between the person and God - the most personal of all Sacraments and we are taught not to interfere there.

My Parish is wonderful - run by Franciscan friars - Capuchins and they are quite liberal, but this nonsense about denying communion is coming from the fringes of the church and people who are smart enough to look at this nuanced issue see that a new protestantism would erupt if they really tried to do it.

How's that for a runon sentence?

[truthspeaker]

8. Don't tell us. Tell those bishops.

Personally I couldn't care less. It's just a wafer and a sip of wine to me.

[Maeve]

9. Good! That's the way it should be

That little "judge not,lest ye be judged" thingie...if someone is "unworthy" to receive, that's their own problem and between them and God.

My viewpoint as a former Adult Religious Education Coordinator.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

11. Absolutely - and if it weren't I'd be up oughta there pronto

As it is - my church is the warmest most loving place I know.

Every one should be this way - I chalk it up to the Franciscan Friars as many of the churches I've been to which are run directly by the Diocese are cold by comparison.

[Alpha Wolf]

20. It would be better if you did refuse them...

To receive the Blessed Eucharist in a state of grave sin is itself a grave sin-- and St. Paul instructs that doing so brings damnation upon one's soul. In other words, if you know (for certain) somebody is in a state of grave/mortal sin, you are actually doing them a favor by refusing them communion-- of course, they ought to be refusing it themselves and get to confession, but that's their business.


"Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body." I Corinthians 11:27-29

[DaveSZ]

22. I always thought Jesus was more of a socialist

At the very least he was a peacenick hippie.

:)

I'm glad to hear that it's only a small minority of officials who are using the Eucharist as a political football.

You can also point out that Republican presidents have nominated over twice as many pro-abortion justices to the US Supreme Court than Dems.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

53. Is that true?

Do you have a source?

I'm not doubting, I'd just love to have that as a sourcable argument!

[Az]

54. Sounds socialist to me

Luke 6:30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.

Course I don't happen to believe that the man existed but thats me.

[Bridget Burke]

25. He's not a judge.

How can he know what's in the heart & soul of the communicant?

Not that I'm an actual believer myself, but why believe in a God who's not strong enough to sort that out for Himself?

[Alpha Wolf]

31. Actually, he does know...

at least according to the hypothetical in the original post. I wish he would have given an actual example.

Like maybe he knows some scumbag who raped somebody (heard him bragging about it in a bar to his buddies) and sees him come forward for Communion the next Sunday morning. Or a man who abandoned his wife and kids and is having a very public adulterous affair with his mistress-- even brings her to Mass with him-- and comes forward for communion.

[Bridget Burke]

81. If he heard about a rape, he could report it to the police.

And I'm sure he would.

As for the adulterer, he could cut him socially & see that the church was taking care of the abandoned wife & children.

Why is you god so little & weak that he can't punish the sinners by himself?

[Alpha Wolf]

90. He does.

That was my whole original point. The person receiving communion in a state of mortal/grave sin is bringing condemnation upon his/her own soul. At least that's what St. Paul teaches. If this is true, then wouldn't you be doing a favor by refusing communion to someone? It's at least an interesting question.

[xocolatl]

30. May be true in the Catholic Church

but not in the Episcopal Church.

From my understanding, as an Episcopalian and a friend of an Episcopal priest who has discussed the topic with me, it's actually a sin to refuse communion if offered.

I could be wrong tho.

[Alpha Wolf]

33. It's neither Catholic nor Episcopal in particular...

This is just St. Paul straight from one of his epistles. I quoted it above. All I'm saying is that if what St. Paul is saying is true, then in a way one might being doing someone in a state of mortal sin a favor by refusing them communion. Sort of a tough love kind of deal.

[xocolatl]

34. I acknowledge the St. Paul quote...

... but the culture of each denomination determines what is actual practice.

In denominations such as the Catholic and Episcopal churches, the Bible doesn't have the final say.

[Alpha Wolf]

46. The official Catholic position is straight from St. Paul

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

Section II, Article III

1385 To respond to this invitation we must prepare ourselves for so great and so holy a moment. St. Paul urges us to examine our conscience: "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. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself."216 Anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion.

I'm not aware of the official Episcopal position.

[xocolatl]

55. My point is that different denominations have different policies.

Probably there are different opinions in the Episcopal Church, which tends to have more theological and liturgical diversity.

I only know what my friend believes and what is practice in my parish.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

57. that's a skewed interp. - You are leaving out the teachings of conscience

St Thomas Aquinas has shown that one MUST follow his/her conscience. If one is unsure of mortal sin one must communicate. If someone is knowingly in a state of sin and recieves this is a big problem BUT IT IS NOT UP TO THE PRIEST OR EUCHARISTIC MINISTER TO DECIDE.

[Maeve]

65. The key words are in the quote itself

"let a man examine HIMSELF"--not "let someone else decide".

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

72. Agreed n/t

[Quahog]

32. But how do you know "for certain?"

What mortal man is ever in a position to know with certainty what is in another man's heart? And what does Jesus Christ say about the passing of such judgement?

I am not a eucharistic minister, I am a music minister and involved with Catholic education. But were I to stand at the altar with the Blessed Sacrament in my hands, I could not under any circumstances pass judgement on the worthiness of anyone to accept the Eucharist. Sorry, not my job. I will not attempt to usurp God's authority.

Also, note that St. Paul does not specify what makes a communicant "unworthy." While the church has, over the centuries, codified rules about this (mortal sin precludes communion, venial sin does not), Paul only suggests that a communicant should "examine himself." Catholics are taught before they receive the Eucharist for the first time that this process of self-examination is critical to the sacrament. Thoughtful Catholics take this to heart and make it part of their life of faith (although clearly many have forgotten this critical aspect of rite).

[Az]

36. Blood

Most hearts are filled with blood. Contrary to popular belief the heart is not the source of the mind. If you were to examine the heart you would find it full of blood. /humor

[Alpha Wolf]

40. I couldn't agree with you more...

"Catholics are taught before the receive the Eucharist for the first time that this process of self-examination is critical to the sacrament. Thoughtful Catholics take this to heart and make it part of their life of faith (although clearly many have forgotten this critical aspect of rite)."

But let's be blatently honest for a moment. I have friends who willy-nilly receive communion when they go to Mass even though they are consciously in a state of grave mortal sin. A buddy of mine who was cheating on his wife. Some other friends who were fornicating. When I would question them about these things, their very deliberate and blunt response was basically: "I'll do whatever the hell I want--it's none of God's business"

Is there no one in your parish who is openly and publicly committing mortal sin and not confessing it? Surely you've seen this at least once? It is only in these rare circumstances that I am making this point.

[Quahog]

56. Sure

"Is there no one in your parish who is openly and publicly committing mortal sin and not confessing it? Surely you've seen this at least once?"

Absolutely, I've seen this at least once in myself! I received communion in a state of mortal sin, and later sought reconciliation for having done so. Remember that receiving the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin is simply another sin, and all sins may be forgiven.

The bottom line is, even if I "know for certain" that someone is in such a state, it is not my job as eucharistic minister or priest or whatever to decide who receives and who does not. This is the official church position on the subject, and if you don't like it then you should probably do whatever you do when you come up against church doctrine that you don't like.

I do agree that some intervention as a fellow Christian would be entirely appropriate, in the case of someone who is a friend who is committing this grave error in their faith life. Many Catholics have lost much of the core understanding of their own faith, and it wouldn't hurt to remind them, if you can do it in a way that is helpful rather than hurtful, that receiving the Eucharist in a state of sin is not doing their soul any good (even if, as some would probably argue, it's somehow making them "feel better"). As you correctly state, many Catholics have a "willy-nilly" attitude toward communion, as if they have forgotten that they are approaching the true, living presence of the risen Lord. Anyone who takes this at all lightly has lost touch with what is perhaps the deepest and most significant element of our sacramental life as Catholics.

I would suggest, though, that anyone who states that what they do is "none of God's business" has long since ceased living a life of faith. How could such a statement be made by anyone claiming to be a Christian? It is absolutely fundamental to the faith that it's ALL God's business.

[Az]

58. Um actually

There is an unforgivable sin.

Mk.3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.

Lk.12:10 But unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.

[Alpha Wolf]

70. AMEN!

I guess where it get's sticky is in the case of very public, scandalous sin. See my example in resonse # 67. How would you handle this type of situation?

[Quahog]

92. Any intervention would have to take place OFF of the altar

AW, I see your point... there's bound to be some discomfort for a Eucharistic minister who is approached by a guy he just saw humping his mistress in the church parking lot before mass. I am guessing (as it's impossible to know such things), that this kind of blatant abuse of the sacramental life is rare, that those instances where a priest or Eucharistic minister knows beyond the shadow of a doubt that a communicant is in a state of sin are few indeed. Most sins remain hidden in the hearts of sinners, until they choose to reveal them.

But let's just say for argument's sake that the priest is allowed to make a judgment call on each communicant who comes to the altar. What does this do to the sacramental atmosphere of the mass if each member of the parish must make the walk to the front of the church not knowing whether they'll be allowed to receive the Lord? I mean, what if the priest is absolutely sure I am in a state of sin even though I'm not, and I am turned away in front of my family and loved ones and faith community? What then happens to that faith community, when each attempt at making a loving connection with God becomes a trial and sentence? How many would be willing to risk taking that walk and being falsely or even justly outed as a mortal sinner? The churches would be empty within a few weeks. Worse, the very sacrament that exists solely to bring the faithful into intimate contact with God would produce the diametrically opposite effect, effectively neutralizing the entire raison de etre of the mass.

A priest has a responsibility to shepherd the people of God, and I would consider it an abdication of that duty if any priest failed to attempt intervention with a scandalous sinner who appeared week after week to receive the Eucharist. Such a person needs a talking to, and talking is what priests are for. A priest would not be overstepping their role or authority in the faith community to pro-actively approach such a person and enlighten them to the seriousness of their error. Beyond that, I don't know what they could do, other than to start excommunication procedures. I mean, if a Catholic understands the holiness of the sacrament, and understands the requirement for self-examination and reconciliation prior to receiving communion, but continues to go through the motions just for show and in open mockery of the sanctity of the rite, then clearly there is no adherence to the fundamental beliefs of the church, and that person does not belong in it. I can't really imagine why anyone would behave this way, unless they were simply trying to ridicule the church and its traditions. No person of real faith could continue behaving this way unless they were suffering from some serious mental illness.

A Eucharistic minister, I would suggest, is there to distribute the Eucharist. That is the extent of their responsibility and role, and they should be doing nothing with regard to evaluating the worthiness of any communicant, including tattling to the priest about some horrible sin they're certain someone else is committing.

[Alpha Wolf]

93. Agreed.

It is not the place of lay Eucharistic Ministers to determing who should receive and not receive (Actually, IMHO, the lay ministers shouldn't even be up there except in extremely extraordinary circumstances-- but that's a entirely other discussion). The priests though, and ultimately the Bishop do have the right to determine that a Catholic is in such a state that he/she ought not to come forward for communion until such state is changed/confessed/renounced, etc. This can be handled privately-- but in some cases of extreme public scandal, formal excommunication proceedings are commenced.

All of this is going to come to a head I believe in the next few years as the Bishops and Pro-Choice Catholic politicians are ever more often facing off with one another. This has been front-page news in my part of the country for a few months now. The Bishops are exercising their apostolic authority to pronounce that it is a grave moral and public scandal for Catholic politicians to support pro-choice legislation-- and that if they do so they should refrain from receiving communion as they are in a state of mortal sin. The politicians, in turn, are saying they will continue to support such legislation and will continue to receive communion. It should be interesting.

[skippysmom]

51. beautifully put

you took the words right out of my mouth...and made them sound much better than I would have.

It's not up to the people who distribute Communion to determine who is in a state of mortal sin. That's between the communicant and God.

[xocolatl]

38. In any case...

... it's merely an academic point, from my pov.

I believe in universal predestination to salvation. That is, everybody gets saved.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

39. Thats wrong - absolutely wrong

How do I know that they haven't confessed?

[Alpha Wolf]

42. Obviously, that would have to part of the equation

Sorry if I didn't make that distinction. Yes, you would also have to know that they hadn't confessed it.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

50. Either way it is not for a 3rd party to decide. If a person has sin on

their conscience that is between her and God. If she is compelled by her conscience to confess - fine, but that has nothing to do with me.

[Alpha Wolf]

67. It could have something to do with you

By the silent, yet very public, message that is given when a person receives Communion. Take this example. There is a white-supremest living in your neighborhood. Let's call him Mr. Z. He litters his bumper and lawn with violent, hateful messages about people of color. He proudly acknowledges that he is president of the local chapter of the Aryan Nation and actively tries to recruit young people in the neighborhood. Several businesses and homes owned by people of color have been severely vandalized and graffiti-ed with death threats. An inter-racial couple was brutally beaten in a nearby park and the girl later died from massive head injuries. Everyone in the neighborhood knows that Mr. Z was involved-- and when confronted he only says, "They'll never prove anything-- besides, those two betrayers got what they deserved!" Mr. Z attends Mass at your parish occasionally-- usually just Christmas and Easter. When challenged that his beliefs and practices are not acceptable with Catholic morality, he scoffs and claims bluntly, "I don't give a damn what the Church says. The Church is wrong. He also proudly claims that he hasn't been to confession since he was a child. Says he doesn't need it because he's the one who's really doing the Lord's work.

Now, on Easter Sunday, Mr. Z gets in your line and comes forward for the Holy Eucharist. What do you do? What message would this be sending to entire community?

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

73. I give him communion and so would our priests.

The communion line is notthe place to resolve this. The confessional would be. The best thing would be to confront him outside the sacramental ritual.

[Alpha Wolf]

76. Okay. That's tough, but honest.

Let me tweak it up one more notch though. What if Mr. Z were challenged outside of the Mass-- in fact, challenged publicly by laypersons, the priests, and the local bishop-- that he should not come forward for communion without first going to confession because it is bringing public scandal to the parish and to the Church. In response, Mr. Z publically responds, "The priests and bishop have no business telling the layperson what he should and shouldn't do. Not only will I go to Mass and receive communion this Sunday-- but I'm going to do it every Sunday just to shove it in their holier-than-thou faces". He then shows up on Sunday, with all the local news affiliates rolling their cameras, dressed in a KKK hood with a swastika on the back and comes forward for communion.

Should we still give it to him?

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

77. Absolutely - he's bringing scandal to himself - publicly sinning proudly

he makes the church look sane by comparison.

[Alpha Wolf]

79. Thanks-- great discussion!

n/t.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

82. Thank you- its nice to have a real talk!

Welcome, btw!

:toast:

[Alpha Wolf]

87. Thanks, but I've been here for a while...

I just don't post that much. Don't really have the time, I follow a lot of threads though.

[Alpha Wolf]

88. Thanks, but I've been here for a while...

I just don't post that much. Don't really have the time, I follow a lot of threads though.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

78. But a Eucharistic Minister cannot know what is in someone else's heart

nor is God as small-minded as human beings are.

[Quahog]

26. Right on

One or two whack-job bishops who have no problem defying church doctrine get lots of press with their Kerry bashing, but the doctrine is clear. As you suggest, the act of communion is between the individual and God, and should not be taken lightly (i.e., in a state of mortal sin). But it is up to the communicant to make that judgement before approaching the altar, not the priest or bishop or anyone else.

Glad to hear your parish is following the right path on this issue.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

48. Furthermore St Thomas Aquinas has shown that man MUST obey his

conscience. Thus, if a person feels that they are not in a state of sin, even if they are, they should follow their conscience and communicate. Who am I or anyone else to interfere? Now that's the teaching.

This with holding of communion is a ruse - don't believe the hype people!

[skippysmom]

47. Good to hear!

I'm always heartened to hear that my church hasn't gone completely insane.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

59. Don't believe the hype!

We still have some of the best people in the world in our clergy!

[Az]

61. But not all

Just a cautionary comment.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

63. Of course, of course. What segment of society doesn't have its miscreants?

I do have to stand up for the majority who truly care and want to help people while not ignoring the minority who have prayed upon the trusting and the innocent.

[Az]

66. Love is a powerful motivator

And it does not always motivate actions that have positive outcomes despite the intent. The Clergy will always appeal to those who have kindness and compassion in their mind. They put their faith in a system that they believe leads to truth. Their kindness guides their actions. This is why when skeptics point to these people as doing harm we are singled out as the nefarious individuals rather than the clergy.

Always remember that the most heinous crimes in humanity are often committed in the name of love. Love and compassion are wonderous things. But left unguided by reason they are like fire. Able to keep us warm or destroy us utterly. We are at our best when we use all our senses to guide us. Love alone is blind. Reason without love is merciless.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

75. True indeed, however we have to find a way to punish and expose the

guilty and protect those who do good. I concede to your point about love but I would say that I would never hold those who are the skeptics you mention as nefarious as I believe their prime motivation is compassion (though we must admit that there are selfish interests on both sides). This is a tricky terrain we're traversing - all alliteration aside.

[Az]

80. Together

We are all born blind and screaming into this world. It is only striving together that we begin to make any sense of it.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

83. Seen

As they say in Jamaica

[LiberalKid]

62. My mom is a [Catholic] Eucharistic Minister..she gives Communion to..

Everyone. Period. She herself is pro-choice, and she dislikes the "Bishops tell you who to vote for" scheme.

[Tsiyu]

68. Much Ado About Nothing

Interesting comments. Christianity on the whole has been a failure, in my human opinion. Those who claim to follow Jesus ( who prayed that those who followed him be as one ) will never agree on who he really was or what he stood for or how to follow him. In the name of Christ, my leaders wage war against the poor, against those who would publicly scrutinize their misdeeds, against the opressed in other nations. Tell me how Jesus enlightened them? And why you would see him as an answer to anything?

I have read the bible many, many times and once believed at least the gospels. Christ made a lot of sense. But even this thread shows the irrelevance of Christ. Because he who claimed to be 'The Way and the Truth and the Light' is always usurped by Paul ( the true Messiah, as most Christians would prefer to quote Paul on theological matters.) Why not call yourselves Paulians?

I know this is a thread about receiving communion ( yes, I celebrated the Eucharist thousands of times in my life) but to cut to the chase, communion is merely one sacrament, one of many. How many priests who molested boys still get to take communion? Are they "forgiven?" It seems that the RC Church is only concerned with abortion as it is a means to control WOMEN. If you support blowing up babies once they're born, or raping them once they can walk, do you still get to partake? No doubt.

I would never try to take away your faith or tell you how to practice, but I can promise you, i could never say anything positive about an institution that is known for widespread -unreported and unpunished - pedophilia. The Pope and other hardliners can swallow a camel yet strain at a gnat.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

71. Duly noted my friend

And I do apprecaite your candor

[Rose Siding]

85. That's the Spirit!

Blessings on you and your ministry.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

89. Thanks Party_line!

'Preciate it!