Catholics whining about Stephen Harper

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The Catholic Church basically says:

-The Eucharist somehow becomes the actual Body and Blood of Christ.
-They can't explain how, you're just supposed to accept it as some fantastic mystery.
-That's why their church is so awesome, no other church has that.

Really the logic is circular, they basically say you should be Catholic because of something that makes no sense unless you accept Catholic authority to begin with. I consider the whole thing nonsense, so of course I view it as idolatry.

This would be like me saying that my apartment is the best apartment in the world because it's  magical apartment though I can't explain how. But because it is so magical my apartment rules and is superior to every other apartment in the world and if you dispute that, you are committing a grave sin by doubting the amazingness of my apartment.

Oh, I pity your heresy.   To never know the fullness of Christ Jesus as the church fathers and companions of the lord did. To be bereft of a legitimate church and be led by 16th century invention.  Our church and the eastern churches have a strong foundation that is not based on a kings balls or protecting princely title.

More like "20th century invention loosely affiliated with a 16th century invention."

I know that under normal circumstances it's to be Catholic-only (like pretty much all denominations)

Very very false. The program I got the last time I went to church says "We practice open communion, all are welcome to Christ's table." And the vast majority of Protestant churches allow it to all baptized Christians at least, even if not everybody.

The way some Catholics view the Eucharist I'd argue is outright idolatry.

All (dogmatic) Catholics. Blasphemy as well as idolatry.

But honestly, all Christian churches look incredibly - hilariously, almost - blasphemous from a pure monotheist pov. For what it's worth.

How about the last one I went to? They don't even have an actual church building, just rent out a theater.

[minionofmidas]

Dude, I was referring to that whole strange Some Obscure Historical FF Was Actually God's Son, Or God Himself, Sort Of thing. Not to church buildings.

Though I do hold that services should always be held at accustomed centuries-old holy sites. Conquerors knew what they were doing when they put their churches and mosques on the sites of old temples.

[pogo stick]

Sucks to be Harper. He's one of my favorite world leaders.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'm curious how this affects Phil's opinion of Harper. is he now against him?

[Keystone Phil]

I'm curious how this affects Phil's opinion of Harper. is he now against him?

1) I never really cared about the guy that much anyway. He represents the side I prefer in Canada. Other than that, whatever.

2) No, I'm not "against" him because of this. I didn't bother to read the article but I gather that he put the host in his pocket during Communion. It's just a really stupid thing to do. The guy wasn't doing it to be a dick while others (like people in this thread who know better) would do it just to be disrespectful and piss people off. That being said, I would expect the guy to know better.

[Magic 8-Ball]

I'm not familiar with Catholic funerals.  Are all attendees expected to partake in communion, Catholic or otherwise?  I know that under normal circumstances it's to be Catholic-only (like pretty much all denominations), but is leeway generally given for events such as this?

Either way, if Harper didn't know what to do, he shouldn't have taken the wafer.

A funeral mass is the same as a regular mass.  No one is "expected" to receive communion-catholic or otherwise.   Before you receive you should be in a holy state.  You should contemplate our lords sacrifice and saving power. No one is checking ID's. You are receiving the lord. 

Interesting.  I had the impression that Catholics practice closed communion.  I mean, I know that there's no quiz or anything beforehand, but I thought that it was intended for Catholic communicants.

I know that under normal circumstances it's to be Catholic-only (like pretty much all denominations)

Very very false. The program I got the last time I went to church says "We practice open communion, all are welcome to Christ's table." And the vast majority of Protestant churches allow it to all baptized Christians at least, even if not everybody.

Apparently.

[Zarn]

It is only for Catholics, but the priest was apparently trying not to embarrass Harper. That didn't work out.

[MaxQue]

It is only for Catholics, but the priest was apparently trying not to embarrass Harper. That didn't work out.

Priests can give the Communion to someone who is not Catholic is some circumstances.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It is only for Catholics, but the priest was apparently trying not to embarrass Harper. That didn't work out.

Priests can give the Communion to someone who is not Catholic is some circumstances.

I'd still refuse.

[minionofmidas]

It is only for Catholics, but the priest was apparently trying not to embarrass Harper. That didn't work out.

Priests can give the Communion to someone who is not Catholic is some circumstances.

I'd still refuse.

You aren't supposed to stand up and try taking it. If you do though, people will assume you're probably suddenly a Catholic now, and give it to you.

[Zarn]

It is only for Catholics, but the priest was apparently trying not to embarrass Harper. That didn't work out.

Priests can give the Communion to someone who is not Catholic is some circumstances.

Duh...

It's just not suppose to happen.

[Holmes]

Sucks to be Harper. He's one of my favorite world leaders.

What do you know about him other than his political party?

[Hatman 🍁]

Last year I went to my cottage with a couple of my Catholic friends, and much to my amusement, there was no Catholic church in the town, so they were forced to go to my Protestant Church with me. One of them took communion, the other didn't. It clearly said in the programme that all could take it.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It is only for Catholics, but the priest was apparently trying not to embarrass Harper. That didn't work out.

Priests can give the Communion to someone who is not Catholic is some circumstances.

I'd still refuse.

You aren't supposed to stand up and try taking it. If you do though, people will assume you're probably suddenly a Catholic now, and give it to you.

Right, but I'd never accept any communion or anything from a priest, since I don't consider any Catholic priests to have a legitimate job. It's much the same way I refuse to recognize the authority of the Pope, or even the office in fact. In my view there is no such thing as the office of Pope, there's just some joker wearing a silly hat who calls himself Pope and has convinced too many of this fact. It'd be like if I started calling myself the King of Minnesota and convinced others to do so as well. Still doesn't change the fact no such office exists. The office of the Pope exists but I don't consider it valid or legitimate, (maybe it's comparable to the President of South Ossetia.)

[Smid]

2) No, I'm not "against" him because of this. I didn't bother to read the article but I gather that he put the host in his pocket during Communion. It's just a really stupid thing to do. The guy wasn't doing it to be a dick while others (like people in this thread who know better) would do it just to be disrespectful and piss people off. That being said, I would expect the guy to know better.

I read the article a few days ago, and am working off memory now, but if I remember correctly it didn't necessarily say that he pocketed it - just that he took the communion wafer, the tv camera hovered on him for a bit, he did nothing with the wafer, the tv camera moved onto the next person and there is no footage of Harper doing anything with it after that. Indeed, I think the article said that it's very possible he was assuming it would be like many protestant churches - where people often partake together. That's how it was in the church where I grew up, at least for the wine (well, technically grapejuice) - we ate the bread individually, but drank the wine collectively as one. It's even possible he was meditating on Christ's sacrifice before partaking, that's what I do - I take the bread and then think about what it means, and then put it in my mouth. It's possible that Harper did this and then placed it in his mouth after the tv camera wasn't focusing on him (not that he was considering the camera, but did it without realising that was going on).

Now I don't know if that's what he did or not because according to the article, PMO hasn't clarified. That is the bigger political issue, I think - that PMO hasn't clarified what Harper did. I would be very surprised if Harper would pocket communion - I can't see any reason why he would, but I mean, without clarification, I don't know what happened.

[Smid]

Yeah, here's the original article, from the link posted by BRTD. I'm going to bold the points to which I referred and underline the initial hypothesis made. I question where the journalist plucked this hypothesis as nothing in the rest of the article suggests this. Perhaps the footage shows him putting it in his jacket pocket, but if so it should have said as much, although the fact that the article acknowledges that he could have placed it in his mouth after being off-camera (second bolded section) suggests that there is no footage of him actually pocketing it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Smid]

Turns out the whole thing was a work of fiction:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yp1Htm0dBs

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Haha. Crybaby Catholics whined so much about nothing. Figures though, they always whine.