That is true, but there is a difference from be culturally Catholic, which I consider myself to be since I grew up that way, and people who attend mass weekly and take communion while not believing some of the key beliefs of the faith.
Where does contraception fall on the belief scale? Almost all but the devoutest of Catholics I know completely ignore the Church’s stance on contraception.
'T’was in the summer of ‘67 I was going down to Memphis by the stage, when upstepped a couple of shellback baptists on one of their blue-nosed missionary sprees. “Yer bastids !” I exclaimed friendlylike and spat in their faces; d’you know those sarpents pitched me out of the coach, I rolling downhill whilst I cursed them to blazes — couldn’t take a bit of friendly criticism, the swine.’
Actually, I’m reminded of one of my favorite facts: that George Fox was undoubtedly persecuted; but when by his own autobiography everyone he met seemed immediately impelled to kill him, one starts thinking that it wasn’t his quakerism that was the cause.
Dear old Father Chiniquy had some hilarious stories — bearing in mind that this was the nineteenth century and hilarious meant collapsing with laughter at a ‘knock knock’ joke for prostrate days on end — about RC priests misusing the ‘body and blood’ etc. through carelessness. Then again most of them were Jesuit plotters and no better than they should be.
Because if you did it in private it would be creepy.
This laff riot is chock full of people going to the stake for claiming consubstantiation or symbolism rather than transubstantiation. An action that seems poorly thought out. Fun to argue about in a bar, but nothing to die over.
Nitro, please don’t make the mistake of believing that Roman Catholic beliefs are the original beliefs of all Christian denominations. Roman Catholics restrict communion to even a subset of Roman Catholics. Most other Christians are not in communion with Roman Catholics.
As to whatever you see as the first part of your question, until I saw Mel Gibson’s idea of the crucifixion, I wouldn’t have known what you are talking about. I’m not sure if anyone regards Mel Gibson as an authority on Christian theology
What subset? All Roman Catholics over the age of eight is a pretty big subset of Roman Catholics, especially with so many ignoring the Church’s teachings on birth control. And, like it or not, what eventually became Roman Catholic beliefs ARE, if you follow the splits all the way back (to 451 for some, the 11th century for others, and again in the 16th century), the original beliefs of all Christian sects. Yeah, there has been some evolution over the centuries but one cannot deny that modern non-Catholic Christian beliefs began as questioning of and separations from those core beliefs.
The subset of Catholics in good standing are allowed to take communion.
That’s really far more objectionable than the eucharist thing. Not just the glorification of Jesus’ subititionary redemptive sacrifice, but the attribution of spiritual necessity to such a thing. To take away the sins of the world? There are no sins. There is evil, but it’s not the same thing.
Which, in practice, is all of them. The excommunication stick isn’t used much these days.
My point is: Roman Catholics don’t allow non-Roman Catholics take their communion. Therefore, there is no reason to make other Christians account for Roman Catholic beliefs.
Yeah, we tried to make nice with them a few years back and become co-communicants, but negotiations got mired in the difference between transubstantiation and Luther’s “Real Presence,” which requires an impressive amount of theological hair splitting. Me, I’m a Memorialist so when I ushered on days when someone was being baptized I would encourage Catholics who were sitting out Communion to join in. Any way you look at it it’s a nice blessing and the host was not going to burst into flames on their tongues.
And how did I know they were Catholics? Simple: they weren’t taking Lutheran Communion. I know my peeps and how they think because while I’m a lousy Lutheran I was a very good Catholic back in the day.
Wrong. Excommunication is a different thing than not being allowed to partake of the Eucharist.
In the Roman Catholic Church, that is exactly what it is.
nm
Yeah, I guess. Usually, not taking the eucharist is a self-imposed punishment for some sin or other. My ex quit going to communion when she was on the pill, for instance, as contraception was eeeeevil. No guilt trip on me there. :rolleyes:
Nowadays, excommunication is more than a simple , self-enforced " I can’t receive Communion because I have an unconfessed sin". It may be that in the past that was considered a form of excommunication, but that hasn’t been true in my lifetime.
Wait. You mean there’s a whole range of excommunication, not just one “You’re out of here” penalty?
They can’t afford the damage to the bottom line.
You can’t take communion if you haven’t been to confession in over a year, your automatically excommunicated if you’ve had an abortion or aided in any way whatsoever someone attaining one, etc. There are many reasons one can’t take the Eucharist. I’ll pull out my Catechism later.