R
RBushlow
Guest
This is incorrect. Please don’t just make statements like this. If there is any basis for your assertion, please post the citation.
- Status
F
Fr.JLT
Guest
Let’s not forget that we do not only refuse Holy Communion to most (though not all) non-Catholics, we also refuse Holy Communion to many Catholics, ie, those persisting in beliefs outside the Church’s teaching, anyone in mortal sin, etc etc.
Remember the guy in the Gospels who was invited to a wedding and ended up being cast out into the night to wail and to grind his teeth because he wasn’t wearing th eproper wedding garment? Sounds harsh, eh, until you see the historicity of it, which Jesus’ Jewish listeners would have recognized immediately.
If you go to a temple or synagogue, in most instances, there will be a bin of skullcaps and racks of prayer shawls. You don’t have to have your own. They are right there at the entrance to put on before entering the place. Such it was similarly with some kind of shawl or stole or such thing at weddings in the time of Jesus.
The point is, the fact he wasn’t wearing the proper attire, like he was too poor or something (poor him), but that he REJECTED the garment that he was supposed to put on before he entered, a direct act of beligerance and rejection, and an insult to the hosts, the couple and the sacredness of the event.
Refusing Holy Communion to people is not denying them a seat at Christ’s table by any means. It is recognition that they have, in fact, REJECTED their seat at Christ’s table. With that, Holy MOTHER Church, ih her intense concern for souls, invokes Saint Paul’s words and PROTECTS the rejecting party from consuming his own condemnation. It is an act of Motherly Concern and Godly Mercy.
– Fr. L.
Remember the guy in the Gospels who was invited to a wedding and ended up being cast out into the night to wail and to grind his teeth because he wasn’t wearing th eproper wedding garment? Sounds harsh, eh, until you see the historicity of it, which Jesus’ Jewish listeners would have recognized immediately.
If you go to a temple or synagogue, in most instances, there will be a bin of skullcaps and racks of prayer shawls. You don’t have to have your own. They are right there at the entrance to put on before entering the place. Such it was similarly with some kind of shawl or stole or such thing at weddings in the time of Jesus.
The point is, the fact he wasn’t wearing the proper attire, like he was too poor or something (poor him), but that he REJECTED the garment that he was supposed to put on before he entered, a direct act of beligerance and rejection, and an insult to the hosts, the couple and the sacredness of the event.
Refusing Holy Communion to people is not denying them a seat at Christ’s table by any means. It is recognition that they have, in fact, REJECTED their seat at Christ’s table. With that, Holy MOTHER Church, ih her intense concern for souls, invokes Saint Paul’s words and PROTECTS the rejecting party from consuming his own condemnation. It is an act of Motherly Concern and Godly Mercy.
– Fr. L.
A
Arwen037
Guest
I would like to know how I have rejected my seat at the Christ’s table.
F
Fr.JLT
Guest
PResuming that you havenot left the Catholic Church to become a Protestant, it isn’t a direct action of yourself, but rather inherited, to a degree, by your spiritual forebears who did reject the Church. However, official Catholic teaching is very clear that those alive today are not to be held responsible for the original schisms from the Church, it is still something that’s inherited in the condition of being a “separated brotehr.”
– Fr. L.
– Fr. L.
A
Arwen037
Guest
Well, if I’m not to be held responsible, isn’t that sorta like saying that I can’t take my seat at Christ’s table because someone else said I didn’t want it?
A
Arwen037
Guest
And would it make any differance if one of my parents were Catholic, but it was the other one who worked with my faith?
S
Steve_Andersen
Guest
Area Man:
You don’t go in someone else’s house and break the rules regardless of who you think is the author of those rules
We all know there are no “communion police” checking you for your secret Catholic tattoo before you receive so the matter is really just between you and God but come on you know the answer
Would you go into a synagogue with your head uncovered?
Would you go to an AA meeting with a cooler of beer?
Well to begin with it is just plain rude
You don’t go in someone else’s house and break the rules regardless of who you think is the author of those rules
We all know there are no “communion police” checking you for your secret Catholic tattoo before you receive so the matter is really just between you and God but come on you know the answer
Would you go into a synagogue with your head uncovered?
Would you go to an AA meeting with a cooler of beer?
F
Fr.JLT
Guest
Dear Arwin,
Once we are made aware of something, it then becomes our responsibility to deal with it.
In terms of being raised in a mixed marraige and the non-Catholic party raises the child(ren) non-Catholic . . . I am presuming you are an adult, in the sense of at least mid-late teens. In that case, it is up to all of us, on a daily basis, Catholics alike, to reassess, recommit, reconfirm and, as well, change if necessary.
Also, I’d like to say, I certainly mean no insult. I tend to be dry when I’m typing and you definitely can’t get the sense of the tone of voice and all of that when reading just black-and-white. I detest when someone makes light of or tramples my “Sacred Cows” and I have no intention of doing so to you. But I did want to make it clear that it is not only non-Catholics, but even Catholics (perhaps it could be said, each and every Catholic, at some point in his/her life) who cannot always receive Holy Communion.
– Fr. L.
Once we are made aware of something, it then becomes our responsibility to deal with it.
In terms of being raised in a mixed marraige and the non-Catholic party raises the child(ren) non-Catholic . . . I am presuming you are an adult, in the sense of at least mid-late teens. In that case, it is up to all of us, on a daily basis, Catholics alike, to reassess, recommit, reconfirm and, as well, change if necessary.
Also, I’d like to say, I certainly mean no insult. I tend to be dry when I’m typing and you definitely can’t get the sense of the tone of voice and all of that when reading just black-and-white. I detest when someone makes light of or tramples my “Sacred Cows” and I have no intention of doing so to you. But I did want to make it clear that it is not only non-Catholics, but even Catholics (perhaps it could be said, each and every Catholic, at some point in his/her life) who cannot always receive Holy Communion.
– Fr. L.
R
RMP
Guest
It is not our place to refuse someone a seat in the Catholic Church. But to take part in the eucharist while not in commmunion with the Catholic Church is more of a protection of the individual rather than an exclusion. The eucharist saves us while in grace, but damns us otherwise. That is why PAUL asks everyone to explore their own hearts seriously before eating our LORD’s flesh and blood.
R
RMP
Guest
sorry, I missed this post .
Do priest ever withhold communion from anyone ?
I am not a priest, just asking.
E
Exporter
Guest
So, AREA MAN,
Your words "a. The invitation to the Lord’s Supper is extended to all who have been baptized, remembering that access to the Table is not a right conferred upon the worthy, but a privilege given to the undeserving who come in faith, repentance, and love. In preparing to receive Christ in this Sacrament, the believer is to confess sin and brokenness, to seek reconciliation with God and neighbor, and to trust in Jesus Christ for cleansing and renewal. Even one who doubts or whose trust is wavering may come to the Table in order to be assured of God’s love and grace in Christ Jesus.“were,”
*For practical purposes then, this *PRIVILEGE given to the undeserving who come in faith, reepentance and love"…This means that if a man commited adultary the night before and stole a six-pack on the way to church…*could walk right up and recieve communion because he has faith, repentance and love.He confesses his sins as he walks up to the front, huh? Since he is recieving only bread and grape juice it matters not.
Your words "a. The invitation to the Lord’s Supper is extended to all who have been baptized, remembering that access to the Table is not a right conferred upon the worthy, but a privilege given to the undeserving who come in faith, repentance, and love. In preparing to receive Christ in this Sacrament, the believer is to confess sin and brokenness, to seek reconciliation with God and neighbor, and to trust in Jesus Christ for cleansing and renewal. Even one who doubts or whose trust is wavering may come to the Table in order to be assured of God’s love and grace in Christ Jesus.“were,”
*For practical purposes then, this *PRIVILEGE given to the undeserving who come in faith, reepentance and love"…This means that if a man commited adultary the night before and stole a six-pack on the way to church…*could walk right up and recieve communion because he has faith, repentance and love.He confesses his sins as he walks up to the front, huh? Since he is recieving only bread and grape juice it matters not.
N
NewChristian27
Guest
I thought that’s what all churches believed? That’s not so?
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Areaman, also for NewChristian27
If you do believe that the Eucharist truly becomes the body and blood of the risen Christ, then why are you still a Presbyterian, since they do not believe that.
Catholic communion is not a symbol of our unity with non-Catholics…it is not a symbol…it IS Christ present in the bread and wine.
You should not receive communion at Mass. Fold your arms accross your chest and just bow your head for a Eucharistic blessing, but that is all.
Here’s what the CCC says concerning this:
1398 The Eucharist and the unity of Christians. Before the greatness of this mystery St. Augustine exclaims, "O sacrament of devotion! O sign of unity! O bond of charity!"234 The more painful the experience of the divisions in the Church which break the common participation in the table of the Lord, the more urgent are our prayers to the Lord that the time of complete unity among all who believe in him may return.
1399 The Eastern churches that are not in full communion with the Catholic Church celebrate the Eucharist with great love. “These Churches, although separated from us, yet possess true sacraments, above all - by apostolic succession - the priesthood and the Eucharist, whereby they are still joined to us in closest intimacy.” A certain communion in sacris, and so in the Eucharist, "given suitable circumstances and the approval of Church authority, is not merely possible but is encouraged."235
1400 Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, "have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders."236 It is for this reason that Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible for the Catholic Church. However these ecclesial communities, "when they commemorate the Lord’s death and resurrection in the Holy Supper . . . profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory."237
1401 When, in the Ordinary’s judgment, a grave necessity arises, Catholic ministers may give the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church, who ask for them of their own will, provided they give evidence of holding the Catholic faith regarding these sacraments and possess the required dispositions.238
Footnotes:
234 St. Augustine, In Jo. ev. 26, 13: PL 35, 1613; cf. SC 47.
235 UR 15 # 2; cf. ⇒ CIC, can. 844 # 3.
236 UR 22 # 3.
237 UR 22 # 3.
238 Cf. ⇒ CIC, can. 844 # 4.
Pax vobiscum,
The early church did not even share your opinion, since they dismissed all those who had not been fully catechised prior to the actual Eucharist and it is just this very reason that you should not partake of a Catholic Eucharist. Do you believe that what you receive is actually the body and blood, soul and divinty of the risen Lord Jesus Christ? That in spite of the outward appearances that have not changed that it does indeed miraculously become that? Did you worship the Eucharistic presence of Christ in that bread & wine? That’s what you’ve been participating in and if you do not agree with that then you have a problem.
If you do believe that the Eucharist truly becomes the body and blood of the risen Christ, then why are you still a Presbyterian, since they do not believe that.
Catholic communion is not a symbol of our unity with non-Catholics…it is not a symbol…it IS Christ present in the bread and wine.
You should not receive communion at Mass. Fold your arms accross your chest and just bow your head for a Eucharistic blessing, but that is all.
Here’s what the CCC says concerning this:
1398 The Eucharist and the unity of Christians. Before the greatness of this mystery St. Augustine exclaims, "O sacrament of devotion! O sign of unity! O bond of charity!"234 The more painful the experience of the divisions in the Church which break the common participation in the table of the Lord, the more urgent are our prayers to the Lord that the time of complete unity among all who believe in him may return.
1399 The Eastern churches that are not in full communion with the Catholic Church celebrate the Eucharist with great love. “These Churches, although separated from us, yet possess true sacraments, above all - by apostolic succession - the priesthood and the Eucharist, whereby they are still joined to us in closest intimacy.” A certain communion in sacris, and so in the Eucharist, "given suitable circumstances and the approval of Church authority, is not merely possible but is encouraged."235
1400 Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, "have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders."236 It is for this reason that Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible for the Catholic Church. However these ecclesial communities, "when they commemorate the Lord’s death and resurrection in the Holy Supper . . . profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory."237
1401 When, in the Ordinary’s judgment, a grave necessity arises, Catholic ministers may give the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church, who ask for them of their own will, provided they give evidence of holding the Catholic faith regarding these sacraments and possess the required dispositions.238
Footnotes:
234 St. Augustine, In Jo. ev. 26, 13: PL 35, 1613; cf. SC 47.
235 UR 15 # 2; cf. ⇒ CIC, can. 844 # 3.
236 UR 22 # 3.
237 UR 22 # 3.
238 Cf. ⇒ CIC, can. 844 # 4.
Pax vobiscum,
R
rsagebrush
Guest
Do not give the Bread of Angels to dogs. Those who do not believe all the tenents of the Catholic Church and are not in full communion with the church and are not disposed to recieving communion, should not be taking commmunion in the Church.
The Priest will not check your credentials when you are standing in line he assumes you know what you are doing. Any Priest giving Catholic communion to knowingly to a non Catholic is commiting a grave error IMHO.
The Priest will not check your credentials when you are standing in line he assumes you know what you are doing. Any Priest giving Catholic communion to knowingly to a non Catholic is commiting a grave error IMHO.
F
FrRobSST
Guest
No. While the Churches in Communion with the Roman See, the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriential Orthodox, and many of the Old and Independent Catholics believe that Christ is truly present, body, blood, soul, and divinity under the appearance of bread and wine, the vast majority of Protestant Christians do not accept this as a true doctrine.
Most believe that Communion is a very special meal in which the symbols of the Body and Blood of Christ are taken and recieved as a remembrance.
The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist was a major issue that spawned from the Reformation. While Luther taught a version of the Real Presence (somewhat inaccurately named Consubstantiation - which was not Luther’s view but rather Walther’s), Calvin utterly abandoned it, as did Zwingli. All three had influence on the English Reformation, so some did believe and remained in belief of the Real Presence while others abandoned such a belief.
Rob+
C
chevalier
Guest
According to the Catholic Catechism, a Protestant may receive Holy Communion if he believes what the Catholic Church believes about the Eucharist. But why not become Catholic from Protestant if believe Catholic rather than Protestant on the Eucharist?
A
A_O
Guest
Reference? I’m pretty sure those not in communion with Rome cannot ordinarily receive.
C
Catholic_Heart
Guest
Presbyterians do NOT have closed communion…And, only the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran does…Not the Evangelical Lutherean Church of America (ELCA)…Some Baptist churches might practice closed communion, but most do not.
D
Dr.Bombay
Guest
Many non-Catholics attend Mass and receive communion out of ignorance. They genuinely don’t know they shouldn’t.
Then you have the self-centered, arrogant type who think the universe revolves around them and they can do pretty much anything they want. They know the Church asks non-Catholics not to receive but they do anyway.
If I ever attended a non-Catholic service, I wouldn’t dream of taking part in it. And I certainly wouldn’t presume it’s my “right” to do so. We should always respect the internal disciplines of a religion, whether we agree with them or not. It’s called common courtesy. Sadly, courtesy is getting rarer and rarer nowadays.
BTW, the originator of this thread hasn’t posted anything since last July, so I don’t think he’s still listening.
Then you have the self-centered, arrogant type who think the universe revolves around them and they can do pretty much anything they want. They know the Church asks non-Catholics not to receive but they do anyway.
If I ever attended a non-Catholic service, I wouldn’t dream of taking part in it. And I certainly wouldn’t presume it’s my “right” to do so. We should always respect the internal disciplines of a religion, whether we agree with them or not. It’s called common courtesy. Sadly, courtesy is getting rarer and rarer nowadays.
BTW, the originator of this thread hasn’t posted anything since last July, so I don’t think he’s still listening.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Still, this is a vital issue that really does need to be put out front. 
- Status