my first catholic church service...

W

weed_eater_guy

It ain't broke, don't fix it!
Registered Senior Member
Hi. First of all, I'm a non-denominational protestant, not by choice but by the fact that military bases only offer a "general protestant" service that I've gone to since I can remember. All good, I don't care, I'm just glad to be a christan. Also, I have kind of a bias against the catholic church as being an unnesscesary, and beaurocratic institution between me and my lord, but I respect it as it is still a church, just a church with one hell of a presence in the world.

Anyway, yesterday, I decided that since I had been sleeping through alot of church services (at 10 in the morning, and I'm a college freshman, you know the deal...), I'd go with a few of my catholic mates to St. Johns. It was interesting: Aside from not knowing everything to say and from doing the cross on my chest backward a few times, I liked it and felt like I could fit in here for a while. Honestly. It was refreshing, the sermon-giver (not sure if it's a priest, preacher, or pastor in the catholic setting) gave a good, engaging sermon, and I liked the experience, and I plan on doing it again.

I told another friend of mine that I went, cause this guy's a die-hard catholic and we've had a few friendly debates on the subject: protestant v. catholic. He was kinda buzzed untill he asked if I did communion. "Of course."

Now the guy almost hates me for disregarding a sacred catholic rule (or something like that). Apparently, I have not officially acklowledged the wafer and wine as the true body of christ. Okay, sure, I still see the fact that it is in fact a wafer I'm eating, but for me it's a symbolism in which one must attach meaning to. Anyone can eat a wafer. Anyone can eat flesh, including christ's physical flesh, and still not be changed. It takes a mental effort to put meaning to the action, and that's my argument for accepting the wafer as a SYMBOL of christ, not his actual... left tendon. It's the true acceptance of christ into your life that matters, not the physical action attached. Besides, if I can do communion in a protestant church, then as a christian, why the hell shouldn't I be able to do so in another christian church?

After debating this heatedly, we're still friends and all, but he asked if I'd go to mass with him next week, in which I told him that if he doesn't have a problem with me taking communion as a christian does (but not a catholic), then sure. Needless to say, he doesn't want to go with me. Apparently, there are other physical beauratic actions that I must first undergo to partake in a christian ceremony that I've done for years. Whatever... Jesus wouldn't have wanted it this way.

I dunno, am I wrong in taking things literally here? Is it wrong for me to defile a stupid rule that a friend of mine takes personally if I can gain enlightenment from the church that I do this in? Does he need to chill out a bit? Or is the catholic church really the supreme authority of god and jesus that is unfortunately controlled and distorted by the minds of men (good-natured men, but still very imperfect). I guess I just want to know what people think here, go ahead, fire away :D
 
weed_eater_guy anglicans (or church of england) let people of similar faiths take comunion in there church but catholics dont. Of corse they arnt going to ask to see your first comunion certificate before they will let you take it but they dont want people of related but different churches taking comunion in the catholic service. Thats probably why he was upset, its like going to someones house and digging into there cupboards without asking if they mind. Well thats the churchs atitude anyway, hope that helps
 
I think it is disrespectful to walk into someone else's house of worship and not adhere to their rules (especially ones they take so seriously).
To me it is akin to walking into a Mosque with muddy boots on your feet, because, although THEY require you to take your shoes off, you don't have to do that at YOUR church.
If I was your friend and a believing Catholic, I wouldn't go to church with you either, because if you can't follow such a simple rule that is important to me and my church, then you obviously do not respect my church or my committment to it.
You don't take it seriously, so you don't take my beliefs seriously.
You are being selfish and disrespectful, therefore why would I bring you into my church, which I take VERY seriously and is VERY important to me?

Besides, if you do not believe in what the religion preaches, its dogma, traditions and beliefs (especially the Roman Catholics) then you shouldn't attend their church.
If you prefer what the non-demoninational Protestants have to say and the light-hearedness they approach religion with, you should not go to such a serious, austere church.
 
weed_eater_guy said:
Hi. First of all, I'm a non-denominational protestant, not by choice but by the fact that military bases only offer a "general protestant" service that I've gone to since I can remember. All good, I don't care, I'm just glad to be a christan. Also, I have kind of a bias against the catholic church as being an unnesscesary, and beaurocratic institution between me and my lord, but I respect it as it is still a church, just a church with one hell of a presence in the world.

Anyway, yesterday, I decided that since I had been sleeping through alot of church services (at 10 in the morning, and I'm a college freshman, you know the deal...), I'd go with a few of my catholic mates to St. Johns. It was interesting: Aside from not knowing everything to say and from doing the cross on my chest backward a few times, I liked it and felt like I could fit in here for a while. Honestly. It was refreshing, the sermon-giver (not sure if it's a priest, preacher, or pastor in the catholic setting) gave a good, engaging sermon, and I liked the experience, and I plan on doing it again.

I told another friend of mine that I went, cause this guy's a die-hard catholic and we've had a few friendly debates on the subject: protestant v. catholic. He was kinda buzzed untill he asked if I did communion. "Of course."

Now the guy almost hates me for disregarding a sacred catholic rule (or something like that). Apparently, I have not officially acklowledged the wafer and wine as the true body of christ. Okay, sure, I still see the fact that it is in fact a wafer I'm eating, but for me it's a symbolism in which one must attach meaning to. Anyone can eat a wafer. Anyone can eat flesh, including christ's physical flesh, and still not be changed. It takes a mental effort to put meaning to the action, and that's my argument for accepting the wafer as a SYMBOL of christ, not his actual... left tendon. It's the true acceptance of christ into your life that matters, not the physical action attached. Besides, if I can do communion in a protestant church, then as a christian, why the hell shouldn't I be able to do so in another christian church?

After debating this heatedly, we're still friends and all, but he asked if I'd go to mass with him next week, in which I told him that if he doesn't have a problem with me taking communion as a christian does (but not a catholic), then sure. Needless to say, he doesn't want to go with me. Apparently, there are other physical beauratic actions that I must first undergo to partake in a christian ceremony that I've done for years. Whatever... Jesus wouldn't have wanted it this way.

I dunno, am I wrong in taking things literally here? Is it wrong for me to defile a stupid rule that a friend of mine takes personally if I can gain enlightenment from the church that I do this in? Does he need to chill out a bit? Or is the catholic church really the supreme authority of god and jesus that is unfortunately controlled and distorted by the minds of men (good-natured men, but still very imperfect). I guess I just want to know what people think here, go ahead, fire away :D
Click to expand...

I think you should steer very clear of the catholic church and get yourself a New King James Bible and read what Jesus said.

All Praise The Ancient Of Days
 
HA like he said anything in the bible, it was written hundreds of years after he died
 
Biblically speaking, your question has more to do with your relationship with your friend and fellow-Christians, than with a church or God. I think you may speak with the priest and come to an agreement that would allow you to take communion there without offending anybody's conscience. Here's a precedent:
1 Cor. 8:4-9 (cf. 1 Cor. 10:23-31)
So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

But not everyone knows this. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat such food they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.

Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak.​
It doesn't pertain directly to communion, obviously, but the principle applies universally (see Romans 14). Among the first Christians, there were people who still believed that food sacrificed to idols would be "unclean" and therefore able to affect their relationship with God. This was not a problem for Christians who knew that food could not affect salvation. They could eat food that pious believers would have walked circles around, without it bothering their conscience.

Paul says our freedom may not be limited by others, but we cannot impose our freedoms on other people. You might ask, "why should my freedom be judged by another's conscience? If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for?" (1 Cor. 10:29-30). Because whatever we do should be for the glory of God (1 Cor. 10:31), and He is not glorified when we insist on our liberties, but when we love each other (Rom. 14:15).
 
Last edited:
Jenyar you dont seem to understand, under the vaticans rules which come from the pope NO person of another denomination may accept communion in a catholic church. Its not up to you or the priest even, unless you are a member of the roman catholic faith you cant accept communion in there church
 
Asguard, thanks for the correction.

I found the following article very helpful as well: Eucharist: Sign and Source of Christian Unity. At the moment, there is serious dialogue going on between Catholics and Lutherans, and this will hopefully heal the rift at its origin. For intercommunion to be possible, the hermeneutical gap between "church" (as Catholics understand it) and "eucharist" (as Protestants understand it) will have to be disappear. Catholics already accept baptism from Protestant churches as valid, and baptism indicates the life (the "body") a person gained through the resurrection of Jesus:
1 Cor. 12:12-13 The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ. For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.

Eph. 4:3-5 Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called—one Lord, one faith, one baptism...​
And during communion, Christians take part in the Spirit of Christ, the very same Spirit which gives us hope of attaining the same resurrection (Rom. 8:11). Baptism "births" the body, communion participates in its life.
1 Cor. 10:16-17
Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.​
Like the Pope said, the focus must not be on ourselves as a church (or churches), but on Christ. In the end it's not the church (or the rituals of baptism and communion) that justifies anyone, but Christ, it's head. (See the warning Paul gives in 1 Cor. 10:1-5).

Here's an article I found regarding the Ecumenical Implications of Baptism. I haven't read all of it, but it supports what I said:
Thus finally the ecclesial "fault-lines" which have already come to light in the doctrine of baptism become clear in a new form. This concerns both the sacramental view of baptism and the sacramental view of the church. Following agreement on basic questions relating to the doctrine of justification, and the basic consensus on the doctrine of baptism, the ecclesiological implications of the doctrine of baptism are now on the agenda of ecumenical dialogue. Here the pneumatological delineation of the sacraments and the church, such as we find them in Orthodox theology, might prove ecumenically fruitful as a means of breaking down institutional rigidities.​
 
Last edited:
one_raven said:
I think it is disrespectful to walk into someone else's house of worship and not adhere to their rules (especially ones they take so seriously).
To me it is akin to walking into a Mosque with muddy boots on your feet, because, although THEY require you to take your shoes off, you don't have to do that at YOUR church.
If I was your friend and a believing Catholic, I wouldn't go to church with you either, because if you can't follow such a simple rule that is important to me and my church, then you obviously do not respect my church or my committment to it.
You don't take it seriously, so you don't take my beliefs seriously.
You are being selfish and disrespectful, therefore why would I bring you into my church, which I take VERY seriously and is VERY important to me?
Click to expand...

Exactomundo. When in another man's home, abide by his rules, and when in your home, abide by your rules.
 
Interesting...

I have to differ though, one-raven, I don't believe this is equivalent to walking in a mosque with muddy boots on. I am a christian, and if the catholic church is truely a "catholic" church, I should be allowed to attend services in that church regardless of the organization in charge. And besides, I don't think I'm offending anyone but my very deep-rooted friend, for my catholic friends that I went with last sunday were flattered that I was open-minded in trying out a catholic service. Didn't make much difference to me, god's house is god's house.

And pardon me, I'm still throwing a biased argument against catholicism, its technicalities never made much sense to me.
 
One thing:

Technically, if you're Eastern Orthodox, you may take communion and fullfill one's obligation in a Catholic Church and vice versa. It goes back to the notion that the Catholics and EO are technically one Church, with both sides considering the other in schism but still valid. The Orthodox have the apostolic succession, for instance, as do the Catholics.

But anyway, yes, the doctrine of transubstantiation is important in Catholicism. Weed Eater, check out this page at the Catholic Encyclopedia:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05572c.htm

Oh, and in Catholicism, it is a priest, although there are also deacons and the like.
 
Adstar said:
I think you should steer very clear of the catholic church and get yourself a New King James Bible and read what Jesus said.

All Praise The Ancient Of Days
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: I think you should steer very clear of the New King James Bible and not believe anything Jesus was said to have said. All lies. All lies.
 
Asguard said:
Jenyar you dont seem to understand, under the vaticans rules which come from the pope NO person of another denomination may accept communion in a catholic church. Its not up to you or the priest even, unless you are a member of the roman catholic faith you cant accept communion in there church
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: I will agree with you that Jenyar doesn't seem to understand. Back in the day when I was a good Catholic, I took a young friend with me to a noon mass. There was probably less than 10 people there. My friend was a Baptist. I introduced her to the priest and told him she was Baptist. When he presented the Eucharist, he offered a wafer to my friend. She reminded him she was not Catholic, but he said that didn't matter -- it was the same Jesus. I admired his progressive attitude about the sacrament. That had a great influence on my future as a christian. He made me realize at that moment that none of it really mattered... that we were not separated from divinity, and there are no separation between religions. We just falsely believe there are.
 
MW - wait. So everything the KJV has about Jesus is a lie, but there [is] no separation between religions? So all are true? Doesn't this conflict with the above?

Geoff
 
Hello weed_eater_guy, welcome to sciforums.

While you do not believe that the Eucharist is actually the Body and Blood of Christ, Catholics do believe this, and their belief is Biblically based, though protestant denominations disagree with how those passages are to be understood. However, the Catholic rule against non-catholics partaking of the Eucharist is also Biblically based, and taken in conjunction with the understanding that the Eucharist is actually the Body and Blood of Christ. While I cannot produce the book, chapter, or verse, nor even a precise quote, when speaking of this issue Catholics argue that we are told in Scripture that unless one is aware and believes in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and unless one is worthy, then one should not receive Communion lest that one eat and drink to his own condemnation. To put it simply, to receive communion while not believing it to be the true presence of Christ, body, blood, soul and divinity, is a very, very grave sin. I do not blame your friend for being upset about it. You may not take it seriously, but Catholics do, and it isn't a matter of such things being traditions of the Catholic Church, it is a matter of how one reads the Bible. This is one of the central divisions between protestant denominations and Catholics. Though you do not believe there is Scriptural precedence for the Catholic rules, that is a matter of your interpretation of Scripture. As a Catholic, I urge you not to take communion again as long as you do not believe the Eucharist is Christ in the flesh. However, as it is the way of the world, I cannot stop you.

As for the point M*W bought up about the priest giving communion knowingly to a disbeliever, that priest would bear the greater sin knowingly giving communion the unbeliever. That would not have been acceptable by any standard of the Magesterium and would have been punishable.
 
"I think you should steer very clear of the catholic church and get yourself a New King James Bible and read what Jesus said."

* Unless of course you want to check out the "Codex Sinaiticus", and do your own translation. Soon available in its entirety online. Unfortunately for Adstar, this would be considered a Catholic Bible. The oldest, before the meddeling started in earnest. One unfortunate result being the KJV.
 
GeoffP said:
MW - wait. So everything the KJV has about Jesus is a lie, but there [is] no separation between religions? So all are true? Doesn't this conflict with the above?
Click to expand...
************
M*W: The KJV was translated by a greedy king with his own slant. I meant to answer you previously when you asked my opinion of Judaism and Islam. Judaism came out of Egypt and their belief in the monotheistic god (Aten Ra, the sun god). Jews don't believe or understand this, just like they don't understand Moses, who they believe wrote their Torah, was fictional. Islam, another faith formed by Abraham, was also based on sun worship and planatary movements. Abraham ushered in the Age of Aries (the ram). Therefore, my understanding of the three main faiths, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, they are all based on sun and constellation adoration. I did not conceive of this idea, but I've been researching it for some time now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top