The inquisition was absolutely nothing related to human sacrifice to appease God. You need to back up your claims (and no I won’t read your book). These claims are outlandish enough to warrant me not reading your book. If you have some evidence to give me reason to take a more serious look, I’m all ears.

One more thing, what about human sacrifice? Do you understand that the inquistion was just this? It was the sacrifice of “heretics” to satisfy the demand of God. In Spain and Portugal until the end of the 1820’s all kinds of religious ritual was carried out, including a mass, when an “auto de fe” was carried out. An auto de fe (act of faith) was a torturous death that was supposedly an act by the condemned person that would make him/her right with God.

Visit my site and preview my book. I think you might find it interesting.

Larry Ball

I agree that Catechumens are not in the Church. But if the Church is a city: Catechumens are like residents who are applying for citizenship–or if they are not yet residents, they are at least beginning to imigrate. Protestants on the other hand, though citizens of the city by their baptism, are not residents.

Note the significance of the key phrasing: “…provided that they demonstrate the catholic faith in respect of these sacraments and are properly disposed.

The issue of Catechumens is a red-herring. Catechumens are a part of the Catholic community, Protestants are not.

In order to evaluate whether such a claim is true or not, we would need to know exactly what “part of the Catholic community” means. A Catechumen is not a member of the Catholic Church. Mystici Corporis 22 lists the three conditions for membership in the Church:

Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed.

Catechumens do not meet the first condition: baptism.

In the peace of Christ,

- Bryan

Canon 844 regards any Christian, not just those who have a valid Eucharist. (Only Catholic, Orthodox and a few schismatic or quasi schismatic groups have a valid Eucharist). As for the Eastern Orthodox, from our perspective, they are permitted to receive the Eucharist at any time. Their own bishops, however, usually don’t allow them to receive.

d. above is worded in the canon “who spontaneously ask for them”. I’m not a canon lawyer, but I’d guess it’s just insisting that the reception be voluntary, not coerced in any way.

Caleb

As far as the Protestants go, Canon 844 § 4 states that non-Catholics who belong to those churches which have a valid Eucharist, true Eucharistic faith and valid Penance can receive our Lord under:

a. danger of death, or, other grave necessity,
b. the norms of the diocesan bishop, or, the conference of bishops are complied with
c. cannot approach a minister of his or her own community
d. asks on his or her own for it,
e. manifests Catholic faith in the sacraments
f. properly disposed.

In other words, we Catholics take reception of the Holy Eucharist very seriously (as St. Paul’s own remarks in 1st Corinthians 11:27-28, for example, would suggest a similar seriousness concerning its reception) so much so that we have such restrictions on who, exactly, can receive it.

Thanks all.
Caleb