Wouldn't the other posts that state that they don't take communion in the Catholic church because they are aware of the church guidelines on this matter (despite
"Huh? Nobody but coco, edg, and crusadergal seemed to be surprised that the Catholic Church has specific requirements to participate in communion. Where did you read in this thread that anyone was insulted by Catholic Eucharistic practices? Could you point those posts out?"
Suprised? No we know how much it takes to be able to have communion at a RC church since we have all been members (at least speaking for myself) since birth. We DID mention how at our masses it is never SAID that it is a "closed" table.
So glad you and crusader answered too because I don't remember any of being "surprised". After all the years of religion classes and masses, it is not "surprising" to find out what has to be done to celebrate communion-lol!! I would also like to know WHEN they say it is a "closed table" at mass because I am also there every single week and have been going to church for 30 + years. Maybe I will ask my priest this week when I go before mass ;)
Exactly. In 25 years of knowing that only Catholics should partake of the Eucharist, the only time that I EVER heard a priest actually announce this was at my grandfather's funeral mass (knowing that there would lots of non-members present).
And until this thread I had never heard the terms "closed table" and "open table", though I understood the concepts.
I would think that the many posts that state that non-Catholics respected the teachings of the Catholic church on this issue and did not partake in communion, despite the claim that "no one would know if they did" would should that they clearly weren't insulted on the closed table practice.
Now if it was a Catholic who was refused communion, depending on the situation, then that person may feel insulted.
Pages
<>
Wouldn't the other posts that state that they don't take communion in the Catholic church because they are aware of the church guidelines on this matter (despite
PumpkinAngel
"Huh? Nobody but coco, edg, and crusadergal seemed to be surprised that the Catholic Church has specific requirements to participate in communion. Where did you read in this thread that anyone was insulted by Catholic Eucharistic practices? Could you point those posts out?"
Suprised? No we know how much it takes to be able to have communion at a RC church since we have all been members (at least speaking for myself) since birth. We DID mention how at our masses it is never SAID that it is a "closed" table.
I would also like to know WHEN they say it is a "closed table" at mass because I am also there every single week and have been going to church for 30 + years. Maybe I will ask my priest this week when I go before mass ;)
<>
Exactly. In 25 years of knowing that only Catholics should partake of the Eucharist, the only time that I EVER heard a priest actually announce this was at my grandfather's funeral mass (knowing that there would lots of non-members present).
And until this thread I had never heard the terms "closed table" and "open table", though I understood the concepts.
<>
I would think that the many posts that state that non-Catholics respected the teachings of the Catholic church on this issue and did not partake in communion, despite the claim that "no one would know if they did" would should that they clearly weren't insulted on the closed table practice.
Now if it was a Catholic who was refused communion, depending on the situation, then that person may feel insulted.
PumpkinAngel
now THAT would be surprising.
can you imagine.."father,there's this message board i log onto and there's posters who call our celebration of the eucharist a closed table..."
i can only imagine the look on his face.
No, I haven't read anything either....I think respect for the ritual clearly shows that one is not insulted.
PumpkinAngel
If one placed conditions on coming to the table, why would you think it was an open table?
PumpkinAngel
Pages