X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CATHOLIC@AMERICAN.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 08:47:51 -0500
From:         URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject:      Re: Church rules

"Gordon C. Zaft" <zaft@CARITAS.COTDAZR.ORG> writes:
}On Jan 4,  4:13pm, noao!URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM wrote:
>} There is a silly little "catch 22" type rule which says that if you don't
>} take communion during the Easter season, you can't take it until you
>} confess to not taking it. This may still be a "rule" or it may have
>} gone the way of "eating meat on Friday", in either case, ignorance of
>} the law is still a somewhat valid excuse in the Church:-)

>        Incidentally, the more correct term would be 'receive' rather
>than 'take'.

Agreed, I thought using "take" conveyed the sense of a crime/sin better.

>The Eucharist is a gift, not something we have a right to.

Interesting twist, since the Eucharist is so closely tied to our spiritual
life:-)

>} I really don't see a difference, either He's present when His followers
>} "do it in memory of Him" or He's not. Whether we call it "trans" or "con"
>} would seem to be irrelevent to Him.

>        Well, doe you not see a difference because you don't understand,
>or merely because you don't think the difference is important?  Which
>'it' do you think Jesus was referring to?  And who decides?

Yes, I don't understand the process (that's why they call it a mystery, I
suppose:-). The words seem simple enough, the bread and wine seem simple
enough, the people involved all call themselves Christians, yet, Christ
decides to show up in one and not the other???
I guess I not only don't understand the process, I don't understand the
end result and how it is different in an Anglican vs. Catholic communion.
Is it part of our faith to believe that God treats each communion
differently?

>Actually, you can receive [communion] twice inthe same day now.

I guess this is good to hear, but, does this mean "unlimited" or have they
now set the limit at two? Also, what does "same day" mean? (Calender,
sun-up, sun-down, earth?)

>} There are a lot of silly Church rules, but the one on marriage doesn't
>} appear to be one of them. I think it comes down to "what God has joined,
>} let no man part" or something like that. But since he gave His apostles
>} the power to join through Him, it would seem reasonable that they would
>} also have the power to "unjoin" through Him, whether they know it or
>} not:-) maybe even an eight sacrament:-)

>        No, it doesn't seem reasonable, since Jesus specifically said
>that what God has joined men must not put asunder.

Well, what I was referring to was the power given to the apostles to
forgive or not to forgive sins, and could this also apply to vows
made before them? I suppose it was stretching things a bit, hence, my
use of the smiley.

>} Are priests who leave the priesthood and marry allowed to receive
>} communion? Seems like the same type of vow being ended to me.

>        It's not the same.  First of all, they have to have received
>a dispensation.  Second, the one is God's law, the second is the Church's;
>she may dispense her own laws but not God's.

Bzzzt, I can't connect the answers to the questions, Gordon:-)
1) Not being allowed to receive communion is a Church law? (if one either
is divorced and remarried or an ex-priest and (re)married)

2) Is a dispensation like an annulment. No valid vow was made in the
original sacrament of holy orders?

Maybe I'd better place an order for that new Catechism:-) -J.J.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU