Catholic Apologetics: Non-Catholics in the Communion Line

Catholic Answers ^ | April 15, 2015 | Michelle Arnold

[xzins]

I was told years ago in Chaplain Basic Course that non-Catholics are not invited to receive the Eucharist. That was pretty straight forward. I did not find it odd. Catholics aren’t the only ones in the world who limit access to their communion to those they consider appropriate.

I was in a Catholic service this past weekend with my son, D-I-L and grandkids. Communion time came, and I didn’t go forward. It’s as simple as that.

If I visit someone’s house and they tell me please not to walk on the grass, I don’t walk on the grass. They probably have a good reason if they are otherwise friendly people.

[Legatus]

Watch and pray. I mean pray.

Absolutely!

Oh and btw, someone is making an offer on our house tomorrow, pray it's what we need it to be please. That goes for the rest of you too. :)

[Mr. Lucky]

Your thinking as to the significance of the Eucharist doesn't govern the Catholic Church's understanding of it.

[johniegrad]

I have no desire to stand in a “communion line” in a Roman church...that bread is a demonic idol..

LOL!!

[piusv]

Will do Legatus.

[catnipman]

“Now if this baby-killer or sodomite is practicing this sin, or if these same persons are politicians that believe in these sins and promote these sins, THEY HAVE EXCOMMUNICATED THEMSELVES and if they present themselves for communion GOD KNOWS they are committing a mortal sin by partaking in Holy Communion.”

But didn’t the sodomites and baby-killers commit mortal sins when they killed babies and sodomitted 8in the first place? So does it really make any difference if they commit a second mortal sin by partaking in Holy Communion? And which of those mortal sins is the worst anyway, Holy Communion, or baby-killing, or sodomitting?

[Coleus]

I have a non-catholic protestant friend who is married to a catholic and he receives holy communion when he attends mass with his wife.

[Lonely Bull]

Okay, then. I have in fact seen the word thrown as an epithet on FR Religion Forum threads and too often. Guess it's more noticeable when one is on the receiving end?

Even if the word itself doesn't appear, a lot of the posts in the Religion Forum breathe that spirit--so much so that the Religion Forum has acquired a certain reputation. Occasionally I see the protestation that the poster is simply faithfully proclaiming God's truth and it's those other people who are horrible, but I suppose if that were indeed the general case, then this reputation would be more often limited to Those Other People.

It's interesting, in a way, to think about all this in light of how one may be "in communion" with someone else.

[ealgeone]

Your thinking as to the significance of the Eucharist doesn't govern the Catholic Church's understanding of it.

However it does correspond to it is viewed in the Word.

[Elsie]

DETAILS!!!

Da debble is in 'em!

[Elsie]

For our fellow Christians

We welcome our fellow Christians to this celebration of the Eucharist as our brothers and sisters. We pray that our common baptism and the action of the Holy Spirit in this Eucharist will draw us closer to one another and begin to dispel the sad divisions which separate us. We pray that these will lessen and finally disappear, in keeping with Christ's prayer for us "that they may all be one" (Jn 17:21).

Because Catholics believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of the reality of the oneness of faith, life, and worship, members of those churches with whom we are not yet fully united are ordinarily not admitted to Holy Communion. Eucharistic sharing in exceptional circumstances by other Christians requires permission according to the directives of the diocesan bishop and the provisions of canon law (canon 844 §4). Members of the Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church are urged to respect the discipline of their own Churches. According to Roman Catholic discipline, the Code of Canon Law does not object to the reception of Communion by Christians of these Churches (canon 844 §3).

 

http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/liturgy-of-the-eucharist/guidelines-for-the-reception-of-communion.cfm

 

 

 

[Salvation]

Receiving the Eucharist unworthily is a grave sin. Your sister and brother in law should not receive Communion.

You are doing the right thing.

BTW, you can always come back to the Catholic Church. Just sit down with the priest and get your questions answered.

Same for your sister.

[Salvation]

Judas left early. Hopefully you don’t.

[ealgeone]

Grave sin doesn’t exist. All sin is sin to God.

[Salvation]

In you denomination you might not differentiate.

But the Catholic Church teaches about mortal (grave) sin and venial sin.

You knew that, didn’t you?

[daniel1212]

I don’t recall Jesus making any distinction about denominational lines when He served the bread and the wine.

Actually, i think there is a good case for closed communion, to ensure it is only those who are of the Body of Christ are partaking, as the Lord's supper is to show His death by that shared communal meal, as per 1Cor. 11.

And ironically it is Caths who claim to believe in the Real Presence that should be excluded from the Lord's Supper, as they usually have never actually been converted, and i speak from experience, praise God now, and contort the Lord's Supper into a form of endocannibalism, supposing to receive spiritual life via physically eating human flesh, though Platonically explained.

[RitaOK]

You dutifully advised, perhaps warned. As for the lack of obedience, if that was the case, it is on their head. But do they know the consequences, is my question?

What IS that scripture about those who receive improperly will sleep (death). I can not remember it at the moment.

I guess my question is more toward wondering why Catholics are so stupid today? We know they are so stupid as to present themselves to receive communion outside of the state of grace and that many are complicit in the sin, by their silence, priests and laity alike. It is either cowardice or lack of belief in the Real Presence, I believe.

You did well and exactly what you were suppose to do. Except for the Catholics, they need to know it is mortal sin, if they don’t already know that.

I attended a Mass with a protestant cousin of mine, who was raised Baptist, floated into Episcopalian by way of a marriage and then divorce. I was mortified when she rose to receive communion. I immediately whispered to her that she could not receive communion. She kept moving along, and said, “Oh yes, I can receive as an Episcopalian”. We had quite a conversation after the Mass.

I explained that even I as a Catholic can not receive without confession and absolution and that wherever she had heard such a thing was more than misinformed, that we are looking at minimum to the sin of presumption, and at worst, mortal sin.

It is time for all of us to stand up and defend the faith, before the Church in the USA turns into gauze entirely. That is the path we are on. If we know better and fail to speak, we are on the broad road to Hell. imho. Lord have Mercy. Thanks for your story. We pray for ourselves and our children for salvation, appealing to His Mercy while it lasts.

[metmom]

I can’t help but wonder what your practicing mother has to say, to your lapsed Catholic sister and the protestant brother-in-law, about the dangers to the soul, for receiving our Lord when entirely outside of a state of grace and from outside the Church.

So we get back to the teaching that there is no salvation outside the Catholic church, which makes salvation contingent on works.

[metmom]

Wow....and here I was thinking Communion was open to anyone who professed faith in Christ as it is a remembrance of Him.

It is in any church I've ever attended.

Because the critical point is Christ, not whether you're a member (in good standing of course) of that denomination

[metmom]

A “baby-killer” or sodomite, if they claim to be Catholic, could have went to confession and confessed this sin and told God they would never again partake in this sin, they are absolved of this sin. That is the reason they would receive communion. Now if this baby-killer or sodomite is practicing this sin, or if these same persons are politicians that believe in these sins and promote these sins, THEY HAVE EXCOMMUNICATED THEMSELVES and if they present themselves for communion GOD KNOWS they are committing a mortal sin by partaking in Holy Communion.

So the church would prevent someone who is a sodomite or baby killer from receiving communion, but they don't do anything about preventing sodomites from consecrating the eucharist and SERVING communion after partaking of it themselves.

So who knew that a priest who ex-communicated himself with a sodomite lifestyle is still worthy to disperse communion all the while standing in a place of being able to decide that someone else isn't worthy.

What hypocrisy.

Must be nice to be part of the protected elite class.