Can a priest refuse communion to someone?

[GwenL]

I got into a “lively” discussion this evening wtih some folks (all Catholic) on this topic. Here’s the situation: there is a politician who claims to be Catholic, and is publicly pro-abortion. This politician publicly disagrees with the Church on the issue, and publicly tells other Catholics that it’s OK for them to also support a woman’s right to an abortion. This politician has sponsored and voted for legislation that makes it easy for minors to get abortions, has sponsored legislation creating and funding programs that conduct abortions overseas. This politician publicly attends Mass every Sunday and publicly receives communion. So, here’s the question. Can a local parish priest refuse to give the politician communion? I’m not asking how it should be handled–but rather, in accordance with canon law and/or Church teachings, can the priest refuse communion?

I know, in some recent cases (the Rhode Island Kennedy comes to mind), the bishop wrote a letter to the person asking that they NOT receive communion, that they meet for catechesis with the bishop, etc. (And that the politician made the letter public, not the bishop or the Church). But, could the bishop have decided that the politician was NOT to receive communion?

I’m not asking whether or not the politician *should *receive, but whether the priest or bishop can refuse them communion.

 

[benedictgal]

I got into a “lively” discussion this evening wtih some folks (all Catholic) on this topic. Here’s the situation: there is a politician who claims to be Catholic, and is publicly pro-abortion. This politician publicly disagrees with the Church on the issue, and publicly tells other Catholics that it’s OK for them to also support a woman’s right to an abortion. This politician has sponsored and voted for legislation that makes it easy for minors to get abortions, has sponsored legislation creating and funding programs that conduct abortions overseas. This politician publicly attends Mass every Sunday and publicly receives communion. So, here’s the question. Can a local parish priest refuse to give the politician communion? I’m not asking how it should be handled–but rather, in accordance with canon law and/or Church teachings, can the priest refuse communion?

I know, in some recent cases (the Rhode Island Kennedy comes to mind), the bishop wrote a letter to the person asking that they NOT receive communion, that they meet for catechesis with the bishop, etc. (And that the politician made the letter public, not the bishop or the Church). But, could the bishop have decided that the politician was NOT to receive communion?

I’m not asking whether or not the politician *should *receive, but whether the priest or bishop can refuse them communion.

In 2004, then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger issued a statement, in his capacity as Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith where he wrote that:

1. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

You can read the statement in its entirety at:

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=6041&CFID=15087006&CFTOKEN=64330264

In other words, Holy Communion can be legitimately refused to a Catholic public official who, even though he knows the teachings fo the Church on abortion, willfully goes against them.

 

[amgp]

I was denied Holy Communion for kneeling to receive at a church my family and I were visiting. The priest told me he was denying me Holy Communion for kneeling, and then he just stepped to the side, and told the next person to come forward (who happened to be my youngest daughter, who was terrified and didn’t know what to do because my entire family always kneels to receive).

Now, in this case, the priest was entirely in the wrong for refusing me Holy Communion, but he did it anyway, and no action was taken against him by the Archbishop, who was notified. So why, in cases regarding politicians who promote and safeguard abortion, aren’t priests more emboldened to deny them? (Especially when Canon law says that they must deny them.) Some priests don’t bat an eye while denying somebody Holy Communion for doing something they don’t personally like (even though what the person is doing is allowed by the Church), but when it comes to clear-cut purely evil acts like perpetuating abortion, the same priest wouldn’t think of denying Holy Communion to an evil politician. Could there be an agenda here?

Canon Law n.915 mandates the denial of Communion to all “manifest, obstinate, persistent sinners,” including but not exclusive to politicians.

catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=989

 

[Claire_from_DE]

I was denied Holy Communion for kneeling to receive at a church my family and I were visiting. The priest told me he was denying me Holy Communion for kneeling, and then he just stepped to the side, and told the next person to come forward (who happened to be my youngest daughter, who was terrified and didn’t know what to do because my entire family always kneels to receive).

Now, in this case, the priest was entirely in the wrong for refusing me Holy Communion, but he did it anyway, and no action was taken against him by the Archbishop, who was notified. So why, in cases regarding politicians who promote and safeguard abortion, aren’t priests more emboldened to deny them? (Especially when Canon law says that they must deny them.) Some priests don’t bat an eye while denying somebody Holy Communion for doing something they don’t personally like (even though what the person is doing is allowed by the Church), but when it comes to clear-cut purely evil acts like perpetuating abortion, the same priest wouldn’t think of denying Holy Communion to an evil politician. Could there be an agenda here?

Canon Law n.915 mandates the denial of Communion to all “manifest, obstinate, persistent sinners,” including but not exclusive to politicians.

catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=989

What an upsetting experience! When visiting a church I try to follow what the others do but I’d never expect the priest to do such a thing. Once when I was in the front pew in my own parish the pastor came over to the pew to give us communion. There may have been a handicapped person at the end of the pew. Anyway, I thought ‘what a good opportunity to receive communion kneeling’. But the priest gave me such a look that I immediately stood up. It was worth more to me to peacefully receive Jesus than to get into an argument then and there.

 

[benedictgal]

I was denied Holy Communion for kneeling to receive at a church my family and I were visiting. The priest told me he was denying me Holy Communion for kneeling, and then he just stepped to the side, and told the next person to come forward (who happened to be my youngest daughter, who was terrified and didn’t know what to do because my entire family always kneels to receive).

Now, in this case, the priest was entirely in the wrong for refusing me Holy Communion, but he did it anyway, and no action was taken against him by the Archbishop, who was notified. So why, in cases regarding politicians who promote and safeguard abortion, aren’t priests more emboldened to deny them? (Especially when Canon law says that they must deny them.) Some priests don’t bat an eye while denying somebody Holy Communion for doing something they don’t personally like (even though what the person is doing is allowed by the Church), but when it comes to clear-cut purely evil acts like perpetuating abortion, the same priest wouldn’t think of denying Holy Communion to an evil politician. Could there be an agenda here?

Canon Law n.915 mandates the denial of Communion to all “manifest, obstinate, persistent sinners,” including but not exclusive to politicians.

catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=989

What was done to you was actually against the liturgical laws of the Church. Please note what the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments stated in its response to people in your situation:

Prot. n. 47/03/L
Rome, February 26, 2003

This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has received your letter dated December 1, 2002, related to the application of the norms approved by the Conference of Bishops of the United States of America, with the subsequent recognitio of this Congregation, as regards the question of the posture for receiving Holy Communion.

As the authority by virtue of whose recognitio the norm in question has attained the force of law, this Dicastery is competent to specify the manner in which the norm is to be understood for the sake of a proper application. Having received more than a few letters regarding this matter from different locations in the United States of America, the Congregation wishes to ensure that its position on the matter is clear.

To this end, it is perhaps useful to respond to your inquiry by repeating the content of a letter that the Congregation recently addressed to a Bishop in the United States of America from whose Diocese a number of pertinent letters had been received. The letter states: "…while this Congregation gave the recognitio to the norm desired by the Bishops’ Conference of your country that people stand for Holy Communion, this was done on the condition that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds. Indeed, the faithful should not be imposed upon nor accused of disobedience and of acting illicitly when they kneel to receive Holy Communion".

This Dicastery hopes that the citation given here will provide an adequate answer to your letter. At the same time, please be assured that the Congregation remains ready to be of assistance if you should need to contact it again.

With every prayerful good wish, I am

Sincerely yours in Christ,
[signed]
Mons. Mario Marini
Undersecretary

This is what the CDWDS stated in Redemptionis Sacramentum:

[91.] In distributing Holy Communion it is to be remembered that “sacred ministers may not deny the sacraments to those who seek them in a reasonable manner, are rightly disposed, and are not prohibited by law from receiving them”.177 Hence any baptized Catholic who is not prevented by law must be admitted to Holy Communion. Therefore, it is not licit to deny Holy Communion to any of Christ’s faithful solely on the grounds, for example, that the person wishes to receive the Eucharist kneeling or standing.

In your case, since your Metropolitan did not address the issue, you have every right to take this matter directly to the CDWDS. In fact, so many of the faithful have written to them that they have had to make repeated statements reaffirming the right of the faithful.

 

[KostyaJMJ]

The only time that I’ve ever seen a priest deny someone the Eucharist was one time at mass this woman with a low cut blouse tried to receive and the priest gave her a blessing and then told her to go cover up. Now if the Eucharist can be denied to woman who is showing too much of her breasts it seems reasonable that the Eucharist should be denied to someone who publicly thumbs their noses at Church teaching.

I’m sure that it would be painted as an issue of separation of church and state and the Church would probably have to be prepared to lose tax exempt status over it but I think it needs to be done.

 

[ProVobis]

The only time that I’ve ever seen a priest deny someone the Eucharist was one time at mass this woman with a low cut blouse tried to receive and the priest gave her a blessing and then told her to go cover up. Now if the Eucharist can be denied to woman who is showing too much of her breasts it seems reasonable that the Eucharist should be denied to someone who publicly thumbs their noses at Church teaching.

I’m sure that it would be painted as an issue of separation of church and state and the Church would probably have to be prepared to lose tax exempt status over it but I think it needs to be done.

Good post. The Church needs to stay out of the political arena and needs to get much tougher on distributing communion. Those that know to fast and know that they are not in a state of mortal sin don’t need admonishing, but the rest, politicians and non-politicians alike, do need some firm directives.

 

[curlycool89]

I was denied Holy Communion for kneeling to receive at a church my family and I were visiting. The priest told me he was denying me Holy Communion for kneeling, and then he just stepped to the side, and told the next person to come forward (who happened to be my youngest daughter, who was terrified and didn’t know what to do because my entire family always kneels to receive).

Kneeling is not illicit, but it could be potentially disruptive to the communion procession. Sudden kneeling could cause the person behind you to trip over you (someone I know almost tripped over someone hitting the floor kneeling just this week). But you shouldn’t be denied communion for kneeling.

On the topic post, a Bishop should be able to deny communion if the person is continuously, unrepentantly sinning. Publicly declaring it should be the last step though, and only if private discussions and requests are ignored.

 

[Don9of11]

You should not have been denied; I realize this is a bit off topic but the whole problem of kneeling for communion could be avoided if they would put communion rails back in the church. In my opinion the complete removal of communion rails was a mistake. On ewtn, I have seen people who will genuflect before receiving, usually they do this when they are next in line and I have never seen anyone tripping or falling over because of this. Even on ewtn there are no communion rails, at least none that I have noticed.

 

[ProVobis]

You should not have been denied;

That’s what they say and that I don’t understand. If you go to a priest for confession, he doesn’t have to absolve you. It should be the same for communion, if he wants to deny you, then he denies you, I would think. I’ve seen it denied a few times even at the communion rail.

 

[PJM]

=GwenL;6276222]I got into a “lively” discussion this evening wtih some folks (all Catholic) on this topic. Here’s the situation: there is a politician who claims to be Catholic, and is publicly pro-abortion. This politician publicly disagrees with the Church on the issue, and publicly tells other Catholics that it’s OK for them to also support a woman’s right to an abortion. This politician has sponsored and voted for legislation that makes it easy for minors to get abortions, has sponsored legislation creating and funding programs that conduct abortions overseas. This politician publicly attends Mass every Sunday and publicly receives communion. So, here’s the question. Can a local parish priest refuse to give the politician communion? I’m not asking how it should be handled–but rather, in accordance with canon law and/or Church teachings, can the priest refuse communion?

I know, in some recent cases (the Rhode Island Kennedy comes to mind), the bishop wrote a letter to the person asking that they NOT receive communion, that they meet for catechesis with the bishop, etc. (And that the politician made the letter public, not the bishop or the Church). But, could the bishop have decided that the politician was NOT to receive communion?

I’m not asking whether or not the politician *should *receive, but whether the priest or bishop can refuse them communion.

In the circumstances as described not only MAY HE, He is Obligated to do so!

The Code of Caon Law

Can. 915 Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to holy communion.

Can. 916 Anyone who is conscious of grave sin may not celebrate Mass or receive the Body of the Lord without previously having been to sacramental confession, unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, which includes the resolve to go to confession as soon as possible.

 

[CDNowak]

That’s what they say and that I don’t understand. If you go to a priest for confession, he doesn’t have to absolve you. It should be the same for communion, if he wants to deny you, then he denies you, I would think. I’ve seen it denied a few times even at the communion rail.

While he *can *do whatever he wants, he *may *not.

He may not refuse absolution without grave cause (ie knowing that you are not actually sorry).

He may not refuse communion because someone kneels. He must refuse communion in the case outlined in canon 915, but that requires a subjective judgement (gravity and whether it is ‘publicly manifest’).

 

[ProVobis]

He may not refuse absolution without grave cause (ie knowing that you are not actually sorry).

This isn’t as automatic as you make it sound.

That there is in the Church power to absolve sins committed after baptism the Council of Trent thus declares: “But the Lord then principally instituted the Sacrament of Penance, when, being raised from the dead, He breathed upon His disciples saying, ‘Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, **and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.’ **By which action so signal, and words so clear the consent of all the Fathers has ever understood that the power of forgiving and retaining sins was communicated to the Apostles, and to their lawful successors for the reconciling of the faithful who have fallen after baptism” (Sess. XIV, i).

newadvent.org/cathen/01061a.htm

 

[CMatt25]

A priest can avoid forgiving a person? That’s weird to me when Christ preached forgiveness. How exactly does the priest know someone is not sincere? As far as Communion I believe in Jn 6:37. Christ said He would refuse no one.

 

[CDNowak]

A priest can avoid forgiving a person? That’s weird to me when Christ preached forgiveness. How exactly does the priest know someone is not sincere? As far as Communion I believe in Jn 6:37. Christ said He would refuse no one.

I know of one case, where the priest knew the penitent well enough, and it marked the beginning of their conversion. As I said, though the priest must be certain, which is rarely the case and otherwise is bound to give the Sacraments.

Canon Law does not take withholding the Sacraments lightly, which is what makes cases like amgp’s so serious.

for the reason for withholding Communion, see 1 cor 11:27-8

(And its may, not can.)

 

[ProVobis]

A priest can avoid forgiving a person? That’s weird to me when Christ preached forgiveness. How exactly does the priest know someone is not sincere?

Actually it is Christ forgiving through the priest.

On the sincerity issue, imagine someone who confesses he stole something but he would find it difficult to make restitution; that would involve some judgment on the priest’s part to forgive, I would think. You can make similar cases for sins of slander and other acts which offend others.

 

[JReducation]

You should not have been denied; I realize this is a bit off topic but the whole problem of kneeling for communion could be avoided if they would put communion rails back in the church. In my opinion the complete removal of communion rails was a mistake. On ewtn, I have seen people who will genuflect before receiving, usually they do this when they are next in line and I have never seen anyone tripping or falling over because of this. Even on ewtn there are no communion rails, at least none that I have noticed.

The chapel on EWTN is not a parish church. It was built as the chapel of the monastery when the nuns lived there. Traditionally, Franciscans have never had communion rails or kneelers in our chapels. We have had them in our public churches.

If you visit our first motherhouse, San Damiano and St. Mary of the Angels, both were rebuilt by St. Francis. Neither had communion rails or kneelers. The brothers and sisters stood during the entire mass. But if you go into the Basilica of St. Francis or the Basilica of St. Clare, those churches have kneelers and rails. They were built for the use of the laity. In the Franciscan tradition, Franciscan women knelt to receive communion and Franciscan men stood. That is still observed in those communities that follow the ancient observances, such as the Friars fo the Eternal Word, the Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration, the Franciscans of the Renewal and several other Franciscan communities.

The chapel at EWTN had a pass-through where the nuns received communion on their knees. On the side that we see is where the friars were. There friars received communion standing. So there was no need for the rails.

There is a difference between a chapel, oratory and monastery church and a public church. Those that are part of the religious house usually follow the customs the religious community, because these customs have been in place for hundreds of years.

I hope that helps you understand why they do not have rails.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[PJM]

Originally Posted by ProVobis
That’s what they say and that I don’t understand. If you go to a priest for confession, he doesn’t have to absolve you. It should be the same for communion, if he wants to deny you, then he denies you, I would think. I’ve seen it denied a few times even at the communion rail.

The reply

While he can do whatever he wants, he may not.

He may not refuse absolution without grave cause (ie knowing that you are not actually sorry).

He may not refuse communion because someone kneels. He must refuse communion in the case outlined in canon 915, but that requires a subjective judgement (gravity and whether it is ‘publicly manifest’).

My comments

***Can, should and does could well be three seperate conversations.

Does the priest have the authority [for both sacraments] to refuse absolution or Holy Communion.

YES!

But as indicated it is NOT a subjective decision. It is based on Church Law being properly applied with specific and sufficient knowledge [OBJECTIVE] to permit and indeed warrant such a decision.***

Holy Communion may never [licitly] be denied to one worthy of receiving this agust Sacrament for choosing a [proper] manner of receiving there God, wether in be standing, kneeling, in hand or on ones tongue. Curretly all are valid options; even if not of equal spiritual merit or value. Such is the current Church Laws.

Given the circumstances of the OPQ such evidence is present and evident and the priest ought to exercise his right on behalf of Mother Church to refuse Holy Communion to such a person who is in OBSTINATE and visible in there definance of God’s truth. Such is the application of Divine Justice.

This type of application in regard to imperfect contrition in the sacrament of Confession, even when the sin are public, must remain between the Confessor and the one confessing, and may NOT be made public.

Love and prayers,
Pat

 

[CMatt25]

I know of one case, where the priest knew the penitent well enough, and it marked the beginning of their conversion. As I said, though the priest must be certain, which is rarely the case and otherwise is bound to give the Sacraments.

Canon Law does not take withholding the Sacraments lightly, which is what makes cases like amgp’s so serious.

for the reason for withholding Communion, see 1 cor 11:27-8

(And its may, not can.)

I already understood how the Catholic Church interprets Paul.

 

[CDNowak]

This isn’t as automatic as you make it sound.

Sorry, I missed this yesterday. The entire conversation is more simple than reality. (Excommunications may be reserved to the bishop or even the Holy See, for example). The broadest answer is of course it can be done, in certain cases it may be done.