No communion for Obama supporters

[nittanyalum]

Originally Posted by irishpipes

Again, this shows a misunderstanding of Catholicism. On any Sunday many parishioners do not take the Eucharist because ANY unrepented mortal sin violates the state of grace necessary to receive it. Not just sins involving voting for pro-abortion politicians.

I'm not sure if many churches are this strict anymore, but I remember growing up as a kid, we lived by the "no food for 1 hour" before Mass. So you either got up early and ate breakfast in time for there to be at least an hour between when you ate and Mass, or you waited until after. When we'd complain, my Mom would remind us how in her day they couldn't even have a drink of water before they went to Mass (big, old church in downtown Philly, Mass was in Latin), so they'd brush their teeth but couldn't even take a sip of water while they were doing it. AND, if they forgot to wear a hat, they would put a tissue over their head because their head couldn't be uncovered. Hard core!

ETA: And so my point is, there would be people that wouldn't go up for communion, but for all you know it was because they'd just had a big family breakfast at Bob's Big Boy or back in Mom's day, it could have meant someone forgot and had a drink of water or cup of coffee before they left for Mass

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by nittanyalum

I'm not sure if many churches are this strict anymore, but I remember growing up as a kid, we lived by the "no food for 1 hour" before Mass. So you either got up early and ate breakfast in time for there to be at least an hour between when you ate and Mass, or you waited until after. When we'd complain, my Mom would remind us how in her day they couldn't even have a drink of water before they went to Mass (big, old church in downtown Philly, Mass was in Latin), so they'd brush their teeth but couldn't even take a sip of water while they were doing it. AND, if they forgot to wear a hat, they would put a tissue over their head because their head couldn't be uncovered

I fast from midnight before Divine Liturgy and I cover as well. (I'm Orthodox.) We stand for the majority of the service and actually have a little snack together afterwards every Sunday because we're all about to fall out. It's basically a twelve hour fast each Sunday. But, in reality, I find that it focuses me a lot more on what's happening. The same goes for fasting from meat on Wednesdays and Fridays. It's recentering.

[SWTXBelle]

One reason I make sure to specify the ROMAN Catholic church when discussing it is because as an Anglican I state that I believe in one holy, catholic and apostolic church every Sunday. My denomination can properly be described as Anglo-Catholic, so there you go. Given the influence of the Roman Catholic church throughout the history of Christianity I am surprised more Christians aren't more educated about it. I've met nominal Roman Catholics who weren't as conversant with their church doctrine as I was.

Also, many Christians believe the church is not an institution as much as it is the body of Christ here on earth. The church is the people, not the building.

eta - I was reminded of the scene in "Angela's Ashes" when Frank throws up after his first communion, and there is a debate as to how to clean it up. With holy water??!!

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

One reason I make sure to specify the ROMAN Catholic church when discussing it is because as an Anglican I state that I believe in one holy, catholic and apostolic church every Sunday. My denomination can properly be described as Anglo-Catholic, so there you go. Given the influence of the Roman Catholic church throughout the history of Christianity I am surprised more Christians aren't more educated about it. I've met nominal Roman Catholics who weren't as conversant with their church doctrine as I was.

Probably a very American phenomenon.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

Probably a very American phenomenon.

Oh, I've known quite a few Brits in the same boat. For that matter, I've known Methodists who have no idea of the role of the Anglican church in their formation. And Presbyterians who would not hire any but Presbys for their classical academy - which means they would not hire Dorothy Sayers or C.S. Lewis, two important (and Anglican!) figures in the formation of classical education as we know it today. I will admit that I'm lucky - my husband has a master's in divinity from Yale, so any questions I have regarding various denominations' beliefs are easily answered. I also find it fascinating to read about other denominations. I recently went to a Greek Orthodox funeral, which was interesting.

eta - back on topic. Have there been any reports as to the parishoners' reactions to the letter from the priest? Or from his bishop?

[christiangirl]

Originally Posted by irishpipes

Your definition of grace is not the issue here, and your post indicates that you do not understand Catholic teachings on grace or of ordination and priesthood.

No, but MY DEFINITION OF GRACE is a key part in the formation of MY OPINION which I'm perfectly within right to state on a public forum.

I understand perfectly well the difference between the "Catholic" definition of grace and my own. I went to a Catholic high school and thus spent a year intensely studying the the basics of the faith as per graduation requirement. My post indicates that grace as illustrated by the actual teachings and stories of Christ should not be revised by anyone except for the One from whom it is comes. Therefore, the Church twisting and limiting such a thing by conditions other than those set forth by the Bible and calling it "grace" is misleading and unfair. This discussion is not based on whoever knows more about Catholicism and not only those baptized into it may have an opinion about it. And let's face it, this entire thread is (unless citations are provided) little more than 7 pages worth of people's opinions.

ETA: Irish, if I sound like I'm snapping at you (and in a mild way I might be) it's partially because I'm having a horrible week and partially because your post toward me came off as snotty on my end. I know it's not your fault how I read your words, but I'm letting you know that, as more and more people are seeming to pass judgement on the faith, your posts are looking frustrated and defensive. At least from where I'm sitting. I'm not purposely trying to offend you or what you believe in.

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

If they can't vote for Obama because he's pro-choice, and they can't vote for McCain because he's pro-capital punishment... who are they supposed to vote for? Was there any candidate at any time that was against both?

IDK, my bff Huckabee?

[irishpipes]

Originally Posted by christiangirl

ETA: Irish, if I sound like I'm snapping at you (and in a mild way I might be) it's partially because I'm having a horrible week and partially because your post toward me came off as snotty on my end. I know it's not your fault how I read your words, but I'm letting you know that, as more and more people are seeming to pass judgement on the faith, your posts are looking frustrated and defensive. At least from where I'm sitting. I'm not purposely trying to offend you or what you believe in.

Snap all you want. None of this is new territory. Catholics have been bashed for ages, and will continue to be as long as they uphold their strong positions. If I sound defensive, it is because I am attepting to defend the Catholic faith. Defending requires defensiveness, no?

As for the grace topic, I take no issue that you have your opinion! I haven't said otherwise, but to hold a Roman Catholic priest to your definition when he is speaking to parishioners who are supposed to share his definition is where I take issue. Does that make sense? It isn't as if that priest was telling non-Catholics what they have to believe. If he were, I would completely understand if you would take offense. That isn't what happened, though.

I think it is interesting that you think I sound frustrated and defensive out of all the posters in this thread. I haven't called names like others have or lost my temper. I am merely addressing fallacies. Don't get me wrong, it is frustrating to have people of other faiths, or those who have chosen to leave the Catholic faith, bash it. But, I haven't said a word ridiculing or judging their faiths, as some have mine. Each person has a choice in their religion. I respect that, but some don't return that respect. So I wonder why you are telling me that I am the one coming off bad here. But like I said, snap all you want. The Lord is my light and my salvation, whom should I fear?

[SWTXBelle]

Whatever your personal opinion, the point of this thread is to discuss a Roman Catholic priest's actions. An understanding of Roman Catholic doctrine would be necessary to make an educated judgment about the validity of the priest's actions. Any other denomination's beliefs are irrelevant to the discussion - and christiangirl, despite the year's intense high school study, you betray a lack of comprehension of the biblical foundation and historical evolution of Roman Catholic tenets. You don't have to be Roman Catholic (at least I hope not, or I'm in trouble!) to comment, but attacking Roman Catholicism with the vehemence you do comes off as defensive. And dare I say - unchristian? What happened to they will know that we are Christians by our love?

eta - irishpipes, I think we posted at the same time!