Since I posted the statement on the BIG OLD War and Peace thread that one CAN start a new thread to keep the conversation more orderly, I am going to take my own advice.

I notice a pretty consistent aversion in the posters to even consider the Roman Catholic Church as a viable option to the CEC. I really would like to discuss this further, please, in a civilized, forthright, non-mean (that is SO not a word :) ), candid, soul-baringly honest way. A couple of questions to get the ball rolling...

1. Why NOT the Roman Catholic church?

2. How can you defend this in light of what you know about church history?

3. Are you saying that Jesus did not leave a remnant ANYWHERE on Earth where the fullness of the faith is maintained?

4. If he didn't leave the fullness of the faith with SOME organized body, then what hope is there for us?

Here are some of my initial thoughts.

To Question 1...Why NOT the Roman Catholic Church?

It seems that many, many people (myself included) were once Roman Catholics. We left because we never felt we truly met Jesus there. I don't think any of us left because we didn't believe in Catholic doctrine. That came later. A big problem for my mother (I was 7 when we left), was that she feared death. She was scared she'd go to hell. When she began hanging around evangelicals, she learned she could have assurance of her salvation. She bolted and never looked back. My husband was a life long Roman Catholic, and he too never had a "personal relationship" with Jesus until he met me (gosh, that sounds like I'M Jesus, which is making me laugh as I type it, but I'm not going to edit my words). He actually was not practicing his faith and figured a good way to get this Christian girl was to buy a Bible and leave it out at his apartment where I'd see it. I did, but the joke was on him. I read Revelation 3:20 and he started crying like a baby. He grew in leaps and bounds at the Bible church we were attending. I'm sure many have similar stories.

Another reason...the CEC is chock full of priests that were previously ministers in other denominations. Being a priest (or minister) is your vocation. Now, I know many of you have to hold down other jobs, but you surely feel your "true" self is most in line with your destiny when you are ministering as a priest or pastor. You've probably had extensive training and schooling, so for all intents and purposes, you are a professional. I can also relate to this, as I am a professional in an area of the arts, and even though there have been times I have had to supplement my income with other work (maybe even full time), I never would define myself by that other work. It was always as an artist. So I understand that too.

The next reason is that some of you say you just don't believe in all the doctrines that the Roman Catholics hold. If you're struggling with the 7 sacraments, purgation, the deutero-canonical books, Mary's dormition or assumption, her pureness, the communion of saints, then I don't think you're even catholic in any sense. If you are struggling with papal infallibility, the filioque, the power of the papacy in general, that I understand, and it's you folks that I am most interested in conversing with.

Questions 2, 3 and 4 are kind of related.

I really do honestly ask the question, what kind of God would leave us with no place to find truth. Not fellowship, not feelings....TRUTH. I find myself faced with the conclusion that he would NOT do that to me. In other words, I don't think he set up the Presbyterian Church and gave them a 23% deposit, then the Assemblies of God a 4% deposit, and the Roman Catholic Church a 33% deposit, etc..., etc.... and the CEC ???% deposit.

No, no, no. We embraced the CEC because it seemed to have it all. THat is what we all want. We don't want half. We're not satisfied with just a little bit of truth. We want the whole thing, to be able to climb in its lap and be surrounded totally with it.

Surely, surely, surely God has that somewhere here on this planet. If he doesn't, he's impossible to know! This seems like a logical conclusion to me. Does anyone agree or disagree? Why?

I guess that I am concerned because we confuse the fullness of the faith with the fullness of the Church. The visible church is not one. Since we're a family, and, as stated on the other thread, not everyone is at the family reunion....it's not a perfect situation.

Let's say the Orthodox Church is that remnant. Is it lacking some spark? Heck, yes, because Jaybird isn't there! And neither is <insert name after name after name>. If we are God's children and we are not all in union, the party will NEVER be all that it's supposed to be.

Let's say the Roman Catholic Church is "it." Why then, did so many of not learn about the faith the way we did in the Bible Church. Maybe it's because all the brothers and sisters who are the great bible teachers aren't there! They're at other churches. So their absence is felt and it causes a real impact on ALL of us. If it didn't seem a little "dead" there, then it would make it seem as if the rest of the family wasn't even missed.

Well, I think that's good enough for starters, so let's get the conversation rolling.

With love my brothers and sisters. We are ALL important in the body and in God's family.

Jaybird
ps - I still encourage you to listen to the mp3 from Peter Kreeft on ecumenism (see my other thread). I think you'd really like it. It's only 35 minutes. Burn it. You won't regret it. Pax!

Amen, Jaybird! I can't wait to comment. Thanks for starting this thread.

Hi there:

Loved your post.....read this one!

Isn't it amazing how good things can look on paper...then reality happens. I bet you no CEC folk are hoverin or lighting candles over the Chocolate Lady . Why do you think that is? B)

Blessings

seraph-m

This is a subjective question and one that can not be answered in just a few words.
The RCC while freshly baked bread for some ....is stale and unpalatable for others.

his question would have different answers for different Christians..why not for the Orthodox, for the Copts, for the Anglicans, Lutherans, Baptists and Pentecostals. To you it is THE CHURCH to me it is indeed a venerable, ancient institution but no more the true Church than one of the Orthodox, nor my small CEC parish... because Christ is where "2 or three are gathered in his name", and by "one spirit we were all baptized into one body". Many of the reasons why you think the RCC is the place for you are the reasons I and other CEC folk no longer go there. Where has God placed you? That, to me is more important a question than why a church versus another.

Precisely because of the witness of history some of the claims of the RCC are unacceptable. Objectively the Catholic Church divided several times and the RCC only the western fraction of Christendom. The history of that venerable institution includes not just the admirable holiness of many nor the defense of human dignity and the teachings of Christ. Less luminous episodes of history show the Church and its authorities as the opressors, the corrupt, the defenders of the staus quo ..on the wrong side of many social and justice issues. Just recently the sexual abuse crises that have rocked the Church in the US is also part of history.

He did...the fulness of the faith is living in the earth in the Church , that includes all baptized believers not just the institutions who claim absolute rights to such. The Church is objectively divided into multiple jurisdictions ....a divided house, a divorced family....fullness is maintained but not exclusively by any fragment ...no matter their apologetics nor pedigree!

Ecumenical dialoge, forgiveness , the prayer of Jesus "may they ALL be one", a little humility on the part of all ! Triumphalist claims by any fragment of Christendom to fullness apart from the rest is imho deluded and does little to advance the unity that has eluded Christendom since 1054. By the way ...our hope is in GOD!

Blessings

seraph-M

Seraph,
I would bet that many CEC members are doing "charismatic" things that many of us consider downright superstitious and ridiculous, on par with things in this article. Or if CEC members themselves aren't doing them, other charismatics are. I don't see what that proves though, except that there are superstitious people in every church.

David

After over 6 years as a member and seminarian in the CEC, I did choose the “Roman Catholic Option” last fall. However, it was not because of problems in the CEC. I had a good experience as a member of Bp. Myers’ parish, and I was not aware of most of the things I now sadly read about in this forum.

What led to my change was my concern for the unity of the church, and my conviction that just as the Bishop is the symbol of unity for the local church, the Pope is the symbol of unity for the Church world-wide. If there is going to be organizational unity in the whole Church, I believe it will only be as the Church gathers around the successor of Peter, who I believe to be the Bishop of Rome.

Although these convictions developed in me a few years ago, I remained in the CEC for several reasons. First, it was where God had placed me, and I had relationships that I believed were worth preserving. Second, I believed that the CEC was called by God to be a bridge to bring together the Protestant and Catholic sides of the church, and perhaps I could best work towards unity by serving in the CEC. Third, I believed that God was calling me to be a priest, and that was not something I could pursue in the RCC.

However, my circumstances changed, we moved from Sherman, and I found myself considering church options. The call to the RCC became strong in my heart again. Also, over the years I had not seen any progress in the relationship of the CEC with the RCC. Intercommunion with Rome seemed to no longer be a goal, and the picture of the CEC as a bridge to heal the division of the Church was fading. I came to the conclusion that I could not let my desire for the priesthood keep me from obeying the conviction in my heart to join the RCC.

Moving into the RCC has not been easy. My wife and I have had to go through a kind of culture shock as we’ve encountered this huge church that is so diverse. It is taking a while for us to find our place in it, but we’re making some progress. One priest advised me to give myself a couple of years to acclimate to the RCC before worrying too much about my vocation. Then I might consider pursuing the diaconate if I still believe God is calling me to ordination. In the mean time, I’m doing a lot of reading, and I’m trying to do some writing in order to crystallize my thoughts. We’ve found a parish that we like, and we’re starting to get involved. I’m receiving spiritual direction right now from a priest who is visiting from Nigeria for a year, and that has been a real blessing.

People have asked me about how I can accept the Marian dogmas or Papal Infallibility. I’m approaching Catholic doctrine in much the way I approached the scriptures when I was a teenager. After investigating the Christian faith when I was in High School, I became convicted that the Bible was the Word of God. There were things in the Bible I did not understand, but so much of it was clearly God’s Word that I accepted by faith that the rest of it was too. I had to admit that my own human understanding was limited, and I submitted my understanding to the authority of Scripture. As I did that, I saw my understanding begin to grow as my mind was conformed to God’s Word. Now I have a similar conviction regarding the authority of the Church, and I’m submitting my limited understanding to that authority. Even after less than a year of being in the RCC, I’m seeing the issues about Mary much differently, for example.

The other concern that people bring up about the RCC is the moral scandals and problems with liberalism. But if I compare the whole of the Protestant world with the whole of the Catholic world, I don’t see the Catholic world as any worse than the Protestants. The difference is as a Protestant, if I don’t like something, I can leave and find a denomination that suits me better. Most Protestants don’t see the problems in other denominations as being a part of their own problem. Although there continue to be individual departures and schismatic groups, for the most part, Catholics stick together and at least put up with their differences until they can be resolved.

Well, that concludes my little essay on my choice of the Roman Catholic Option. I still have great love for the CEC, and I mourn for the struggles that they’re in now. I also respect those who don’t share my convictions about the RCC. It took me many years to get to this place. Some of my CEC friends may come to share my convictions in the future, but if they don’t, I wish them well wherever their journey takes them.

Hi:

Over 23 years among charismatics and Pentecostals I have seem plenty of silliness. However by and large Charismatics are scripture literate and seem to have a good understanding of salvation by God's grace through faith and a developing relationship with God. I am not sure that I can say the same about people I have met and interact with that run to the latest Marian Aparition or deck chocolate driping with flowers...so sorry apples and oranges!

It proves there is a great deal of uncatechized or very poorly chatechized people in the "one true church" where so many of you assure us we will be at home. Coming from a Catholic background and surrounded by craddle catholics among family and friends the convert's zeal is not representative of what many experience in the RCC...and the "chocolate Mary episode" not as isolated as one would hope!

To be honest, you probably thought people with all that history and magisterial authority and all the sacraments in union with the see of Peter and all that jazz you are so keen on selling us would be just a tad diffenernt tha you find ...did you think they would be as on fire as you? ....did it surprise you to find so many lukewarm, uncatechized and would be Episcopalians there?

Thanks for the offer you can keep it with my blessing. One day when the Church is truly one then maybe there will be a more functional home for the scattered. Till the the CEC will be just fine.....thanks!

seraph-M

Hi:

last post was mine.....forgot to log in ...sorry!


seraph-M

Greg Graham,


I too am going into the Roman Church. I have been to 2 services and going to my third at another Catholic not to far from here where Good friends of mine from my CEC Cathedral have gone over to Rome and year ago and are enjoying it tremendously. The husband was a cradle Catholic and has returned Home. Pray for me nad my wife was we start RCIA in September.... Each week has gotten better and better..... Blessing on this Lord's Day to you as you go to Mass.... Take Care, Tony :o)

Seraph-M,

I do truly thank you for your unabashed candor about your feelings about the CEC. You have truly been instrumental in helping me decide where my future lies. I guess I had a romantic notion of what the CEC was, but I see I was mistaken. You are a fine prostelytizer for this particular denomination, as you do not try to define it as something it's not. You are speaking the truth, something others have not done. There are clearly many who in their hearts empathize with you and your description of the CEC, but in order to keep someone like me around, they have tailored the description to suit my fancy.

Thank you for not doing that. You have helped make things very clear. Please continue in your candor. I think it will help people not to be disillusioned in the future. They will know EXACTLY what they're getting when they join the CEC. If I had known, I would have not taken this step, but God knew what he was doing, and I'm glad he let me spend this time, taking baby steps toward something that I was once so vehemently against.

Peace,
Jaybird

Let me amend what I just said...maybe others didn't try to describe the CEC in a less than forthright way. Maybe I just heard what I wanted to hear and filtered out the rest.

A common occurrence, I'm afraid.
Humbled yet again,
Jaybird

Good posts Jaybird.
God bless you on your journey, May God make His face to shine apon you and may you walk in His joy all the days of your life.

Fr. Rusty

Greg, Well there you are!
Hey guy, glad to hear you are doing well.
Give me a call if you can, if you no longer have the number, e-mail me and i will get it to you.

You are missed my friend, you are missed.
I am very happy to hear that you are well and content.

in HIM,
Fr. Rusty

A good post, Jaybird,

I suspect that many (most?) of us did hear what we wanted to hear and applied the appropriate filter when necessary!

However, in my experience, not all descriptions of the CEC were forthright in the beginning -- and there were those in leadership who KNEW that they were not being forthright.

Blessings,

Hello Greg,

I ditto also what Fr. Rusty said, it is good to hear from you. I did not know what had become of you until the clergy cluster. I wish you and your wife well on your journey, sorry I didn't get to say good bye before now.

I have missed you at seminary as well, Scott also, and pray the Lord's Blessing upon you as you make this journey. It will be hard but there are many who have gone before you in the same way. I have been blessed by having the privilege of knowing you two. Hopefully our paths will cross again someday. Till then take care and know that you are loved.

Da

Dearest:

Good luck on your journey, make haste to wherever you feel God is leading you. Just don't be surprised if when all is said and done we meet at the master's table. He seems tobe a lot less particular about who he keeps company with than we do or wether the see of Peter approves of them or not!

As far as the CEC... I do not see myself as a proselitizer for that denomination in any way... if that would be my goal maybe I would be a little more careful with my sales pitch specially in this forum. As it is I am just a simple guy that circumstances has placed in different communities of faith since coming to Christ, and who has found in the CEC a home...not perfect but with potential.

How anyone would have seen a new community of faith with a bishop who used to be a Pentecostal Holiness, one a Methodist the other a Lutheran, one Church of God and a couple of Episcopalians, all with orthodox but varied understandings of the faith as different from what has shown itself to be ...is a total mystery to me. How anyone would compare a church in its infancy to the RCCor the Orthodox is equally incomprehensible. The CEC is what it is therein its beauty or ugliness depending on your perspective...it may not be the place for you.. Where you are going I have been and that is no place for me!

Since you are Christian I have no need to "proselitize" you in any way. There are plenty who have never heard the gospel, who are unchurched and looking for some sort of "spiritual " answers that need to hear! Fortunately my parish has not specialized in recycling or attracting disaffected evangelicals or charismatics with with Romophilia. We have worked with unchurched people most of which have had their first steps with God in the CEC and for whom that is normative Christianity.

If others in the CEC saw their mission in life or "making visible a void" a call to be some kind of bridge for people to find catholicism more palatable that is kind of pathetic...sad indeed. There is so much more to life and being a witness for Christ than that specially in a post modern increasingly secular society largely hostile to Christianity. Proselitizing Christians is kind of like fishing in a fishbowl...hardly the call to be fishers of men our Lord call us to! Yet if your stay in this community of faith, even if unpleasant, gets you closer to wherever you feel your destination is for that I am thankful...we all have our own path to take!

Just keep in mind,as you wisely said, we tend to hear what we want to! Make sure you remember that lesson when you swim across the Tiber ...you may not hear or see all you need to before taking the plunge. Then again that is God's affair and yours...may you be blessed!

seraph-M

Tony:

Thanks for the encouraging message. I'm glad you've got some good friends who have preceeded you into the RCC. I too have a good friend who became Catholic a couple of years ago. He is the person who led me to Christ when I was in High School, but he was in a Bible Church back then. Ironically, I thought he was making a mistake when he joined the RCC because I was going along with the idea that the Roman Church was about to collapse. Needless to say, I've changed my views in that regard! ;) Unfortunately, my friend is in South Carolina, and we're in Texas, so as far as parish life goes, we've been going it alone. May God bless you in your journey, and I hope that you've found a place that can carry you forward.


Fr. Rusty:

Thank you for the very kind message! I miss you too. Please send me your phone number and I'll give you a call.


Da:

Thank you too for the kind words. I know I just disappeared as far as most of the diocese is concerned. In the past, when people left to go to Rome or the Orthodox Church, it had created such a disturbance that I thought it would be best if I kept a low profile. I love the CEC, and I wanted to cause as little harm as possible with my departure. In hindsight, I don't know if the way I did it was helpful or not. :\

I really miss seminary weekends; they were always a highlight of my month. I don't have anything like that now, but maybe that will change in the future. I keep up with Scott by IM and email at least once a week, and he's doing well in law school.

I do want to keep in touch. I will email you later with some Scott stories!

Seraph M,

I'm so glad you didn't take my post in a negative way. I feared you might, but I meant what I said that I really DID appreciate your candor.

If you're in an area where you are able to connect with unchurched people, I completely understand why you wouldn't be hung up on the bigger issues. I volunteer with a disabled, lonely woman, and I promise you, I don't discuss doctrine with her. I just tell her God loves her, and I encourage her to attend the local Bible church. I don't think I yet know how to make the Catholic faith "simple" for others. Because it wasn't a simple process for me to come to it.

One final thought...of course, I wouldn't be surprised to see you at the master's table. I hope I make it! What I've said earlier is that I think the faith is fully and completely there in the ancient churches, but every child of God is not in those churches. They're all over the city in one of many denominations. And our loving Father meets them just where they are. As Malcolm Smith used to say, "He GOES to find the sheep that is lost. THe sheep doesn't even know it's lost until they see the master." May we all see the master, the great shepherd, nudging us along to be more like him.

I am blessed by your Christian charity in your response.

Thank you lots!
Jaybird

Greggraham,

Thanks for you response to my response. It really is nice to connect with people here who are on there journey into the Roman Catholic Church.... I am hopeful for you and me as we journey... Have a nice Monday if you can.


Blessing Tony :D

Greg,
Thanks, yes I would love to hear them. And your stories as well.

Da

I do not think that "the faith" relates only to the history and formulations of what Christians have believed, in that sense the "ancient" churches have the advantage of their longevity. "The fullness of faith" also and maybe more importantly speaks of a relationship with the living Christ....as it is refered to in Scripture. He "the author and finisher of our faith". In that sense I do not think the CEC has any less of the "fulness of faith....Christ is proclaimed, worshipped, preached and truly present in Word and Sacrament.

A note of caution for all of us enamoured as we all are of "treasures old" from an interesting source...I posted it in the orthodox option but it is quite applicable here as well.

What I've said earlier is that I think the faith is fully and completely there in the ancient churches,

Why I Am Not Orthodox

Because of my Orthodox background, and my obvious continuing loyalty to, and theological agreement with, Orthodoxy, I have been asked with some regularity why I am not still Orthodox. ....

The occasion for this is a remarkable article called Reclaiming the Gospel by Dr Bradley Nassif (props to Huw). Dr Nassif makes the case that what is central in the life of the Orthodox Church is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but "Orthodoxy, Orthodoxy, Orthodoxy". He says that while the Orthodox Church possesses the fulness of truth in a formal way, she does not communicate to her people, out of that fulness, the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Dr Nassif writes:

I am convinced that the Orthodox Church preserves the fullness of God's truth, but I am equally persuaded that we have not made that truth meaningful and accessible to our own Church members. The most urgent need in the Orthodox world today is the need for an aggressive "internal mission" of (re)converting our people to Jesus Christ. The gospel of Christ and our life in Him need to be reclaimed as the very centerpiece of Church life.

In my Orthodox days, I could have written those words myself. Now that I am a Lutheran, I still endorse what Dr Nassif says, but I would add that Orthodoxy not only requires the "internal mission" that Dr Nassif talks about, but also needs to recover the "external mission" of proclaiming the Gospel to every creature. Orthodoxy has the fulness of the faith, but inexplicably they choose to keep it to themselves - which, if you think about it, is a pretty deep contradiction.

I'm not a very Lutheran Lutheran. ... But even if Lutheranism isn't 100% correct from an Orthodox point of view, it still places the Gospel at the center of its message and its life. Maybe we don't have a canonical and valid priesthood; maybe we condemn the invocation of saints and monasticism when we shouldn't. But what would you rather have: a valid priesthood which (in Dr Nassif's words) imposes on its people the evil of religious formalism and barren ritualism, and a laity who cleave to the Church primarily as the religious expression of their ethnic subculture; or a priesthood which, though canonically questionable, clearly proclaims the Gospel to laity who cleave to the Church because they hear and believe the Gospel? Like they say, it's an easy choice, if you ask me.



Sadly this statement can be applied not just to the Orthodox... and why, at least for now, until God decides otherwise I am at home in the CEC.

Blessings

seraph-M

FYI for those hoping for a reception in to Rome as a communion for the CEC..no cigar!

SCRANTON, PA: (6/5/2006)--Episcopalians in the U.S. and Anglicans worldwide got cold comfort from a Roman Catholic Prelate who told them that his church would not now, nor in the foreseeable future, offer an Anglican Use Rite with an Anglican liturgy, having Anglican Rite bishops with a parallel jurisdiction with Peter for Anglicans who want to remain in their church.

The Rev. William H. Stetson, Secretary to the Ecclesiastical Delegate for the Pastoral Provision, told some 150 Episcopalians and many who had converted to the Roman Catholic Church that churches like the Traditional Anglican Communion and other Anglo-Catholic churches could apply to Rome, but there were no guarantees that his church would accept them, except on Rome's terms. "I am not sure Rome will gather them in, in one uniate. It is not possible that CEC (Charismatic Episcopal Church) or the TAC (Traditional Anglican Communion) can have their own Pastoral Provisions!

As for me ..I am very glad...with due respect for the Roman Catholic Church , I have been there and it is no place I wish to return to!

Luv

seraph-M

Seraph,

This is actually old news. Read the blog from a month ago. My priest was at the meeting where this was decided. The CEC had her representatives there as well. It is only a disciplinary condition for the time being. However give it seven years and see what good things the Lord does. But you're right, do not expect a cigar, just come offering your souls and expecting salvation in return. Ps. 133
Jesus said, "If any man desires to follow after Me, let him deny himself..."

Your seeing the light, brother!

I am in no way bitter at those who choose not to be Roman Catholic. Moreover I also believe your ordination is valid but with illicit holy orders as The Vatican states.

You state, "The Orthodox are truly Catholic in that they have not added to the Faith once delivered unto the saints as the Roman Church has since the Great Schism of 1054."

If the Orthodox in the "undivided" Church could develop the Faith up to 1054 as reading the Patristics reveals, then why should it cease to be developed afterwards? Did the Holy Spirit ascend in 1054?

It is also a fallacy to believe that there have been no developments since 1054 in the Eastern Orthodox. The truth is that the Canons of the "undivided" Church have changed since then. The Orthodox no longer instructs the same disciplines and just because they claim no development of doctrine it does mean there isn't any. It is easy to make such a claim when they have no centralized catechism or a dogmatic voice. They have an apophatic way of defining what they believe and this allows for many interpretations.

You write, "The Brazilian Catholic Church and the Polish National Catholic Church are validly Catholic with the same apostolic succession as the Roman Church, so if we are not truly Catholic - then neither are the Roman Bishops or the Holy Father for that matter."

Again, I think you misread my quotes. I agree with you here. You are truly but irregularly, illicitly and partially Catholic. These groups like the Orthodox have valid but irregular orders.

I do not theoretically throw anyone but Satan into hell.

It was Vatican II, not JPII, that allowed for Orthodox and Polish National Catholics, not Old Catholics, to partake but not celebrate the Mass nor con-celebrate share. However I am not allowed to partake at the an Orthodox table.

You write, “We have our reasons and to us they are very valid just as your reasons for going to Rome may have been valid ... you are my brother in the Lord and I pray that you would consider me to be the same.”

As I have stated before, I believe going back to 1054 with the Orthodox or just 45 years ago to Bishop Costa- being connected to him and having orders derived from ICAB is better than starting your own group (Adler) and fishing for orders.
According to the Catechism, you are partially Catholic by virtue of your Faith and Baptism, However you personally, as a priest in ICAB/CEC, are a Catholic priest but irregular and illicit since you do not accept the Authority of the Magisterium for reason attributed to Costa 45 years ago. You are also Catholic via your Confirmation in the Roman Catholic Church as a youth. For this, you are culpable and even more answerable for your actions than perhaps even Adler. I know this is hard but it is what the Catholic Church says. I am only repeating the Canons. If I am misinterpreting them, I will promptly repent.

Can you truly say that your reasons for not submitting fully to the Catholic faith are justified? That is something we all have to come to terms with. Brother, are the reasons you continue to rent the visible church really worth it? These are questions I would ask all Reformers as well.

Here is what the Missal says:

Can Non-Catholic Christians be admitted to sacramental communion in the Roman Catholic Church?

As Catholics, we believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of our oneness in faith, life and worship. Members of churches with whom we are not yet fully united are therefore not ordinarily invited to participate in Holy Communion. The Catechism of the Catholic Church reflects on this teaching.
Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, "have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders." It is for this reason that Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible for the Catholic Church. However these ecclesial communities, "when they commemorate the Lord's death and resurrection in the Holy Supper ... profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, number 1400)

Members of the Orthodox churches and the Polish National Catholic Churches share a more intimate bond with us, however. They may receive the Eucharist when they ask for it and they are properly disposed (cf Canon 844).

Again, I would refer to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:The Eastern churches that are not in full communion with the Catholic Church celebrate the Eucharist with great love. "These Churches, although separated from us, yet possess true sacraments, above all - by apostolic succession - the priesthood and the Eucharist, whereby they are still joined to us in closest intimacy. " A certain communion in sacris ... is not merely possible but is encouraged." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, number 1399)

When other Christians who believe what the Catholic church teaches concerning the Holy Eucharist are deprived of access to a church of their own denomination for a significant period of time, they too may be admitted to Communion in the Catholic Church in exceptional circumstances (cf, Canon 844 §4).

These exceptional circumstances are also described by the Catechism of the Catholic Church: When, in the Ordinary's judgment, a grave necessity arises, Catholic ministers may give the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church, who ask for them of their own will, provided they give evidence of holding the Catholic faith regarding these sacraments and possess the required dispositions. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, number 1401)

On November 14, 1996, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB) approved the following guidelines on the reception of communion. These guidelines replace the guidelines approved by the Administrative Committee of the NCCB in November 1986. The guidelines, which are to be included in missalettes and other participation aids published in the United States, seek to remind all those who may attend Catholic liturgies of the present discipline of the Church with regard to the sharing of eucharistic communion.

For Catholics

As Catholics, we fully participate in the celebration of the Eucharist when we receive Holy Communion. We are encouraged to receive Communion devoutly and frequently. In order to be properly disposed to receive Communion, participants should not be conscious of grave sin and normally should have fasted for one hour. A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to receive the Body and Blood of the Lord without prior sacramental confession except for a grave reason where there is no opportunity for confession. In this case, the person is to be mindful of the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible (canon 916). A frequent reception of the Sacrament of Penance is encouraged for all.

For our fellow Christians

We welcome our fellow Christians to this celebration of the Eucharist as our brothers and sisters. We pray that our common baptism and the action of the Holy Spirit in this Eucharist will draw us closer to one another and begin to dispel the sad divisions which separate us. We pray that these will lessen and finally disappear, in keeping with Christ's prayer for us "that they may all be one" (Jn 17:21).

Because Catholics believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of the reality of the oneness of faith, life, and worship, members of those churches with whom we are not yet fully united are ordinarily not admitted to Holy Communion. Eucharistic sharing in exceptional circumstances by other Christians requires permission according to the directives of the diocesan bishop and the provisions of canon law (canon 844 § 4). Members of the Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church are urged to respect the discipline of their own Churches. According to Roman Catholic discipline, the Code of Canon Law does not object to the reception of communion by Christians of these Churches (canon 844 § 3).

Those Not Receiving

All who are not receiving Holy Communion are encouraged to express in their hearts a prayerful desire for unity with the Lord Jesus and with one another.

For non-Christians

We also welcome to this celebration those who do not share our faith in Jesus Christ. While we cannot admit them to Holy Communion, we ask them to offer their prayers for the peace and the unity of the human family.

With permission of NCCB, USCC; for more information, USCCB web site.

My heart is heavy from all of this. I do not mean to be mean. However I feel it is those who refuse to submit to God's will who will, in being a teacher, lead many down a disasterous path and will be judged with a stricter judgment. (St James)

Am I wrong?

If I say I love you all, will that help or does it ring hollow?

Ken,

Lose the Catholic/catholic guilt! B) You're not being mean. You just have the heart of an evangelist. And it's not like the doors haven't been opened to allow you to say your piece.

Anyway....

I wanted to add something that helped me in my decision about whether to choose Rome or Orthodoxy.

I have been told that the Orthodox don't believe in the Primacy of Peter, but they do believe the bishop of Rome is the first among equals, right?

Well, the problem with that is that, in a practical, real world sense, he (now Pope Benedict) is NOT revered in that manner.

Would the response be, "Well, we have our own Orthodox Roman bishop."? (I don't know if they do, does anyone?)

If that's the case, then...

1) How do you prove he's the right guy?, and 2) why is their central location in Constantinople, not Rome? 3) why wouldn't their central location be Rome, if that Bishop was first among equals?

Don't know if I should have posted this here or on the Orthodox thread, but it is something that settled the issue for me.

I felt comfortable sitting on the fence (in the CEC), because I didn't want to choose between Mom and Dad, but that Bishop of Rome, You are Peter, etc... argument holds much more weight, IMHO.

I hope my argument can be understood. I typed this quickly, as I want to go back down to the kitchen and have a second cup of coffee.

Let me know if I need to further elaborate.
Jaybird

Ken and others:
(this is in part a reponse from the other thread)

I appreciate the heart that you write with. I agree that the ones I grieve for the most are those lost to any type of Christian expression because of hurt, perceived betrayal and disappointment in lack of accountability. I also understand that your desire is to point those of us that are "lost" to the only true church that you stand so firmly for.
I have a great love for the RC expression and although there was a time in my life I did believe the "great whore of Babylon" line, I have since repented of that belief and embrace more of the Church's teaching than ever before in my life.
With that said I do not embrace it in its entirety.
I do not agree with the normal things you would expect (from someone with a RC, Pentecostal, Baptist, ECUSA and now CEC background) teachings on Purgatory, some teaching held on the Blessed Mother, the use and payment for annulments. I also have many questions concerning some of the Church’s history from the past that I will not go into here.

The biggest issue I have is a closed table at the Eucharist. In the CEC, I love to hear (and to say) “This Table is opened to all baptized Christians that are in right fellowship with their brothers and sisters in the Lord”. Unfortunately when in a Catholic Mass with friends or at a wedding or funeral I am not welcome to receive the Body and Blood of OUR Lord. I understand that this comes from the teaching that in order to be truly saved you would be part of the Catholic Church. I have heard it said by many practicing (and non-practicing) Catholics that apart from the Roman Catholic Church there is no salvation. This has never witnessed to me as being the heart of the Gospels I read. I see the information you just posted and that grieves my heart as well as the heart of the Father (at least as I know Him).

No my brother as firmly as you are planted in your “imperfect church” I am standing firm in my “imperfect church”. I trust that will worship OUR Lord together one day around His Heavenly Throne if we cannot do it around our imperfect attempts here.

In His Love and Praying For His Mercy
(for us all)

truth in mercy

Dear Jaybird: Yes, the Bishop of Rome is seen as the Bishop of Rome by the Orthodox, and, as soon as the Bishop of Rome would like to go back to being first among equals, the Chair is his, gladly, wonderfully and happily.
It is one of the things the Orthodox would love to see returned to the Church.
There is a good chance of that happening, perhaps even in our lifetime.

I am not sure, from your post, if you understand the difference between the east and the west and why those differences exist.
If, and I say if, you do not, may I humbly suggest that you do learn of these things, from both sides of the street, before you make a final decision?

Now, that said, if God has already instructed you on what to do, please disregard my suggestion.

I would also suggest that with a decision of this magnitude, you also look for confirmation outside of those that are opening doors for you.
The reason being is that they cannot be totally objective.

For instance, I have had people trying to decide weather to be a part of our little Church down here, I can tell them many things, and I believe we are a good little Church here in Tyler.

However, when it comes down to their final decisions, I do not try to sway them, or guide them, I desire that they hear from God.

There have been at least a couple of times when the confirmation given came from people who would normally not have anything to do with a Church like ours.

When a Baptist tells someone: It appears God really does want you in that Church, on that Journey, it’s a pretty good bet they are hearing from God.

Made a Baptist scratch his head at the wonder of God wanting someone to be in a Church full of all those rituals-smile- God is good isn't He.

So again, my suggestion is to study well, really well, do not assume anything just because someone says its true, but rather, study well, ask all the questions of both Communions, God is never angry about us doing that.
Study the life of the Church from both streams and see how they got to where they are.
Continue to ask God and look and ask for confirmation.

Love you, and may God Himself richly bless you and yours in this incredible journey.

In addition, Remember, no matter where you are, you have a friend over here, no matter what.

in HIM,
Fr. Rusty

Although some Catholics may say something of the sort, the official teaching of the Catholic Church is that salvation is possible for those who are not members of the Roman Catholic Church. The document Dominus Iesus explains the relationship of the RCC with other Christian and non-Christian religions. It was written by Pope Benedict a few years ago when he was Prefect for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. I found it very clear and reasonable; hopefully it will be helpful to readers of this forum. Please checkout the link below.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congrega...s-iesus_en.html

Dear Truth in Mercy,

Please let me clarify a bit here:

This seems to be a common objection to Rome from many -- the issue of "closed communion".

First, I must note, that Rome is not the only Christian body which practices closed commuion. The Orthodox rules are MUCH more stringent than than the Catholic rules -- in every and all circumstance!

Second, there are Protestant bodies which also practice closed communion -- yet they never seem to come under the same sort of attack. The WELS (Wisconsin Evangelican Lutheran Synod) and the LCMS (Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod) have rules FAR more strict that the Catholic Church.

Third, there are Pentecostal bodies which also practice closed communion -- not based on doctrine, but based on the pastor's opinion of the the communicant's spiritual state. I find this VERY problematic.

Fourth, when I was in the CEC, EVERY church I was in practiced a "semi-closed/semi-open" communion" in that ONLY those persons who were 1) baptized with water in the Name of the Trinity, and 2) believed in the Real Presence, were admitted to the Eucharist.

Finally, it must be admitted that there is no single, coherent theology of the Eucharist in the CEC. While "Real Presence" is supposedly universally accepted, the nature of the Eucharistic Sacrifice is not -- and is open denied by some CEC bishops. And without Sacrifice -- there IS NO EUCHARIST!!!

Finally, many in the CEC DON'T have a Catholic (or "catholic" if you prefer) view of the Eucharist. This is not my opinion speaking here -- it is observed fact.

Blessings,

Please forgive me, my brother -- but I must disagree with you here.

When Pope John Paul II (the Great) visited Mt. Sianai (sp????) the "Orthodox" abbot refused even to pray with him -- AND introduced him as the "President of the Roman Church".

Pope John Paul approached the Orthodox on NUMEROUS occasions -- and EACH AND EVERY TIME the breakdown in communication came from the East rather than the West.

Item: The East said: "The Filioque must go" John Paul said: FINE!!! Let's put it on the table; and if we need to, we'll get rid of it". The Orthodox left the dialogue.

Item: The East said: "We must re-examine the role of the Bishop of Rome." John Paul said: FINE!!! We'll put that on the table as well! Again, the Orthodox left the dialogue.

Item: The Catholic/Orthodox dialogue broke down for several years. Why? NOT because of East vs. West issues -- but rather, because the Orthodox bishops were fighting so violently amongst themselves, that no dialogue was possible.

Yes, there have been a history of zillions of sins on both sides. But in the world in which we live (over the last 25-30 years or so) all the attempts at healing and reconciliation have come from one side (Rome) and have been universally rebuffed.

This troubles me.

Father Rusty,
So fun to argue with you! You know I think you're a real smartie! Even though you do talk with that New Jersey accent, rahhhht?.

So it sounds like you're saying that the Bishop of Rome is first among equals only when he plays by the Orthodox's rules.

That sounds like they are the "first among equals," but sort of behind the scenes. And the bishop of Rome, if he behaves, is kind of like a puppet ruler.

What am I missing?

Your fellow Jersey friend,
J

David
First I I thank you for your reply.

This grieves me as well no matter the denomination. If we presume that others outside of our expression will be with us in Heaven then we certainly should share the Lord's Table on this Earth.
Also, just because they do it is not a valid arguement :)

I do not doubt this but I can only assure you that is not what I was taught nor in ANY of the CEC churches I have fellowshipped in outside of my home. (SE and NE only) This is related to, I think, the overall dis-unity we are now going through. The Bishops are not in agreement in the core issues of the expression so therefore these things can create friction. It then opens the door for offense and disagreement.

I agree with you here. To be truly Catholic with the Eucharist one would have to be in a real Catholic Church because they believe they are the only ones that can do what they do because they believe they are the only ones that contain the Truth. (I do not mean this as an attack but rather as my understanding of your beliefs. Being raised RC for the first 15 years of my life gave me a lot of exposure to the teachings. Later in life I have numerous practicing RC friends that we discuss stuff like this all the time.) I have also found diversity of beliefs in them as well

Standing Still In Need Of HIS

truth in mercy

Truth in Mercy,

Hi. First let me tell you that my husband has also found the closed table a struggle as well. He doesn't think it's very Jesus-like. So we've gone round about this at home.

The funny thing is that even when I was anti-Catholic, reading those Chick tracts, I never had a problem with the closed table. My reasoning was that if they truly believed it was the body and blood of Jesus, and those who ate it unworthily could die, then they were actually protecting others, because they couldn't be sure if it was, for lack of a better term, "safe" for them to take it. It seemed to me that they really took their belief about it actually being the body and blood of our Lord seriously (I didn't know about the sacrifice part so much then). They knew I only saw it as a memorial meal. So why would I eat a covenant meal with someone when we didn't agree as to what it represented.

It's kind of like eating the food sacrificed to idols. If you don't know what it is, go ahead. But if we do know we are looking at the elements differently, we shouldn't partake.

Okay, what about us who have changed our minds? I think most CEC people (and ECUSA) believe it is the body and blood of the Lord, truly. Some of us believe it is a sacrifice. Some don't.

Let's take the first group...they believe it's not a sacrifice. The catholics do. So does the priest, and that is his "intention" when he's consecrating the host, is it not? So why would those who don't believe it's a sacrifice want to eat a meal with those who do believe it's a sacrifice? Doesn't make sense.

How about the second group? Say my husband and me. We believe it's a sacrifice and the body and blood. So why can't we receive?

Because in addition to it being these things, it is also a covenant family meal, and the Roman Catholic covenant family meal presupposes unity on faith and morals. For those of us in the CEC, we do not accept all RC doctrines, so isn't it disengenuous to eat this meal together, as if we are in agreement?

How about me now? In sort of limbo. Won't be able to take communion til next spring, I guess. And I think I believe all the Catholic stuff. Why do I have to wait?

Well, if I'm correct, my understanding, from Malcolm Smith's Holy Spirit in the Liturgy series, is that in the early church, people who wanted to convert to Christianity had to go through several years (2-3) in order to be catechized. A big reason for this is that the church wanted to make sure they really knew what they were doing, because becoming a Christian meant you were probably going to die before you got wrinkles, (a nice way of putting it) ;) . During that long period of time, after the liturgy of the word, these catechumens would actually leave the gathering as the others celebrated the Liturgy of the Table.

This RCIA class I'm taking doesn't obligate me anyway. I may, along the way, find something completely objectionable, SO then if I took communion before I was ready and willing to declare my faith, that would be problematic.

I guess, again, the big question is, "Why would you want to take communion from these people that you think are in such error?" And, in addition, they arrogantly state, "We're right, and you're not."

Okay. I've said my piece. I don't expect it to sway you, because I haven't done very well swaying my husband. But as David said, the Orthodox are a lot worse in their closed table. You certainly can't sneak in like you can at a RC church where no one knows you. I have a friend who tried to do that, and the priest started an interrogation on her right there in the communion line.

WHICH brings me to another point...if we are preaching the undivided church of the first five centuries in the CEC, and both bodies that divided in 1054 had a closed table, how can that be an objection?

Look forward to your response.
Jaybird

Greetings, Truth in Mercy,

I agree that "just because they do it" is not a valid argument! But I did want to point out that the principle of "closed communion" is not only the majority argument (again, the majority is not always right) but could even be considered a "consensus" issue in Christianity!

I'll also suggest that the concept of "open communion" is a recent (last 100 years or so) innovation even in churches that practice it. I may be wrong here -- but I don't think so.

This may be part of the disunity now, but it has been going on for far longer than the current crisis.

I'm interested here, perhaps you can help me. When I described the communion policies above, how would your experiencese differ? Were unbaptized persons admitted to communion? I would find that troubling. Up until the 20th century, even some Protestant churches didn't admit people to communion until they had been confirmed.

That is not quite what I meant. I see two issues here:

1) A belief in the Real Presence. I think that we can agree that the enormous majority of the CEC believes in the Real Presence -- and such is certainly taught.

2) A belief in the Eucharistic Sacrifice. This is where, in my experience, the CEC is all over the map.

Just some thoughts . . .

Blessings,

BTW -- I have no doubt whatsoever that you have found a diversity of beliefs among your Catholic friends, and to me, that's sad. I have had the same experience.

David and Jaybird

Again I thank you for the dialog. I enjoy discussing such things.

David, you said

I had said

I believe and I was taught that the table is "open" to those Baptized and have no problem accepting it's validity. I think the difference in what we are saying is in the Real Presence. I believe, as I think Jaybird mentioned, it is in the intention of the Celebrant (which is my personal belief and intention when I celebrate) not the understanding of the ones receiving, that validates the Real Presence. Furthermore I have never been in any service (CEC, RC or any other for that matter) that the Celebrant has declared in order to receive you must believe in the Real Presence. I personally do, as do many I know in the SE and NE, request that those that are to receive not only be Baptized but also not be in grevious sin with their brother or sisters in the Lord because of the warning that Jaybird referred to. (I do trust the Holy Spirit to reveal this to them. In very rare cases have I suggested they abstain)

As to your other point

This is exactly what I meant. The current crisis/situation we find ourselves in, I believe, is rooted in this type of underlining disagreement that I guess the HOB felt they could resolve or look the other way on and not be affected. Unfortunately this and a few other major misjudgements have cost us all dearly.
It is still my hope and prayer that God would have mercy on the CEC and turn from His wrath toward us and Bless us once again that we might become all He has prepared for us.

Jaybird, it sounds as though your husband and I do share the same belief on this matter. I see a Jesus welcoming all to come unto Him. Time after time the scriptures teach "all who, those who will, all who receive" etc. Jesus, "the Lamb that was slain from the foundation" did not refuse anyone His presence while on this earth. He also did not refuse anyone His Presence once glorified. Why should we do it today unless for the general matters I have stated above?

It is just my heart and take on the matter. Does it not grieve you to have the Body and Blood of our Lord withheld from you for no other reason except man/church teaching/denominational opinion and because of sin or rebellion on your part?

Blessing to all who read this. Again I say I am not attacking but rather expressing my heart in this matter

truth in mercy

David,


I find this very interesting on Rome has tried to bridge the gap first. I can see now why I am going west to Rome and not Orthodox. Thanks for this clarification

Tony :P :D :lol: B) :rolleyes: :) ;)

Wow Tony,

You are heading West to Rome, Man that is news to me!! :D :lol:

I'm laughing, really, I see nothing wrong with that either. I wish you well.

Da

http://www.iccec-sea.org/sacraments/eucharist.htm

Have a look and give me your thoughts. Cheers.

Guest,
We are not purposely withholding information. We have a few issues we need to discuss as moderators, and David Z. has been busy and so have I. We want to make sure we run the CEC discussions in a proper manner. My goal is to reopen the discussions soon.

God bless,
David

Guest,
Because I forget I have email on here. I apologize. Keep in mind that I started this forum only a few months ago, it was very sleepy, and then suddenly took off. I am still figuring this out. I will read the email and get back to you. Also, our contact info may found at Ancient-Future.Net Contact Page.

Thanks,
David