Toto

This admonition by Paul has been brought out in the controversy over whether the Catholic Church should bar Catholic politicans who do not follow the Vatican's instructions from mass (for their own good):

1 Corinthians 11:27-30

27 Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep.


If this were true, we would expect to see liberal Democratic Catholic politicans getting ill and dying off at an alarming rate. But Kerry seems pretty healthy (for his age anyway.)

Paul5204

You actually missed the far larger point to be made, which is, what does it mean to recognize the body of the Lord? Apparently, wholly in line with modern culture, the rich and the powerful expressed disdain for having to eat with the "have nots" and the "nothings." The obvious expression of this sentiment was their unwillingness to share their food, leaving some of the poor of their congregation to go hungry. The "high quality" food eaten by the rich and powerful was eaten to just that end, to show the rest that we are "high quality." Y ou've read that other Paul's other words, yes? If not: "There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all." So do you recognize the body of the Lord? And here is the context for you:

"In the following directives I have no praise for you, for your meetings do more harm than good. In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God's approval....do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not! "

So, yes, you rich and powerful who think that your good food shows that you have God's approval vis-a-vis the have nots and the nothings, why don't you go and eat at home....where no one can see what you eat....

You can see the acid dripping from that other Paul's lips, yes? These people using the "caliber" of their food to justify not only their own sense of self-worth vis-a-vis the have nots and the nothings, but also their own position in the power structure of the Roman empire.......so that other Paul says....eat at home where no one can see what you eat...unless, of course, you wish to despise the church of God and not see the entire congregation as the body of Christ.

Toto

Paul5204 - that is the surrounding text, but it hardly seems like a context. Paul clearly tells people not to eat the Lord's supper in an unworthy manner, otherwise they might get sick and die.

Paul5204

Toto:

But what was the "unworthy manner?" Was it a state of "mortal sin?" Or was the concern not over one's "sin status" [as it were] but over division within the Christian church? Kerry may be pro choice, but he professes to have lots of love for the have nots and the nothings. If that is the reality, then he wouldn't be taking communion in an "unworthy manner." At least according to that other Paul.

Chili

Correct and that passage was actually a warning for us not to enter into an intimate relationship with Christ in an unworthy manner. This would be getting "born again" out of our own free will instead of Gods will (see Jn.1:13).

When Catholics receive communion they are sanctified by grace and this is what makes them worthy to receive.

Toto

So - John Kerry takes communion and is in apparent health. Does this imply that he is sanctified by grace (whatever that means) and that God approves of his stance on abortion? I can't see any other interpretation.

Chili

Yes, Catholics are made worthy to receive by grace until they are made worthy by God. This would be through faith (or nature) and excludes self serving schemes that believers invent so they may be counted among the righteous.

God is not a law maker towards righteousness but rather toward sinfullness in that the laws were given to Moses to convict humans of their sinfulness and never to achieve the ultimate state of righteousness.

The real question now becomes if the enforcement of morals interferes with Gods plan of salvation and should politicians have the right to do this? Ie. "Vengeance is mine, I will repay" (Rom.12:19).

CX

Not only that, but I should be dead. I've taken communion twice since I deconverted.

Godless Wonder

I've taken communion, and I've been an atheist all my life. (Went to Christmas mass once just out of curioustiy with a friend whose mom was Catholic, and he told me not to take communion, but I did it anyway. My friend was an atheist too, but his mom didn't know it, so he had to go. That was many years ago. There was nothing magical about it, no smiting either. About the same effect you get from your average cracker, but less tasty.

sodium

The quote suggests that what is at issue is doctrine rather than sin. It isn't exactly clear to me what not recognizing the body of the lord would entail, except that this is something done by people who do take communion, and are presumably Christians. They could be Christians who deny that the communion involves the actual body of the lord. They could be Christians who think it is a spiritual rather than physical body involved in communion. Or who don't interpret the ritual as related to Jesus at all. Any of these could be termed not recognizing the body of the lord. But it's a big stretch to think that "not recognizing the body of the lord" means not adhering to some unrelated Church doctrine.

So I guess that's why Kerry survives. Presumably he really does believe that the Eucharist involves eating the literal body of the lord.