Communion and Non-Catholics

[sgcecilia]

In order for one to receive Communion, one must be in a state of grace (I agree), believe in the True Presence (I agree), and be Catholic. I’m not sure if I agree with the last one. Shouldn’t a Christian of any denomination be okay to receive the Eucharist if they meet the first 2 requirements?

 

[cheezey]

In order for one to receive Communion, one must be in a state of grace (I agree), believe in the True Presence (I agree), and be Catholic. I’m not sure if I agree with the last one. Shouldn’t a Christian of any denomination be okay to receive the Eucharist if they meet the first 2 requirements?

thank you for asking more concisely.
I was delving into that on another thread…
and, by the way, getting 2 comments that, well, hurt.
Anxious to hear more. After all, we worship the same God. All Christians believe in One God, NOT 2 masters…

 

[missadeangelis]

In order for one to receive Communion, one must be in a state of grace (I agree), believe in the True Presence (I agree), and be Catholic. I’m not sure if I agree with the last one. Shouldn’t a Christian of any denomination be okay to receive the Eucharist if they meet the first 2 requirements?

No. They would have a deficient knowledge or belief of the “state of grace” and could not discern the real presence in the Eucharist in the full Catholic sense. Furthermore, only baptized Catholics may receive the Blessed Sacrament.

Personal opinion doesn’t matter. If the Church teaches something, then that’s that. It’s final.

mda

 

[missadeangelis]

thank you for asking more concisely.
I was delving into that on another thread…
and, by the way, getting 2 comments that, well, hurt.
Anxious to hear more. After all, we worship the same God. All Christians believe in One God, NOT 2 masters…

Authentic Catholic doctrines and beliefs are unique and only found within the Church. While we as Christians worship and believe in one God, other ecclesial communities and the Catholic Church are not equal. They weren’t created equal… While parts of Catholic Truth may be found in the beliefs of some ecclesial communities, the Catholic Church alone retains the fullness of Truth.

mda

 

[R_C]

In order for one to receive Communion, one must be in a state of grace (I agree), believe in the True Presence (I agree), and be Catholic. I’m not sure if I agree with the last one. Shouldn’t a Christian of any denomination be okay to receive the Eucharist if they meet the first 2 requirements?

No, because they are in material heresy. If they were previously Catholic, then they are even in formal heresy and thus excommunicated.

Remember that the Church subsists in the Catholic Church, and all other “denominations” are communities not in full communion with the Church.

 

[ElizMary]

Just to clarify, among the above “qualifications”, one must have received a valid baptism (not necessarily a Catholic baptism). Valid, in this case, means baptism in a Christian tradition that believes in the Holy Trinity. Previous poster may have meant that, but just so there’s misunderstanding. Lower case “catholic” (universal) baptism works.

 

[liquidayno]

only baptized Catholics may receive the Blessed Sacrament

If you mean Catholics that have a valid baptism (even if it was a Protestant baptism), then yes, you are right.

If you mean that you must have been baptized in a Catholic Church, then you are wrong.

To the OP: Why would you WANT to partake in the Eucharist if you are part of another denomination? Simply partake of the eucharist there where it means what you believe. If you feel strongly that you want to partake in Catholic Eucharist, and actually experience the True Presence, then why not become Catholic?

 

[cheezey]

Just to clarify, among the above “qualifications”, one must have received a valid baptism (not necessarily a Catholic baptism). Valid, in this case, means baptism in a Christian tradition that believes in the Holy Trinity. Previous poster may have meant that, but just so there’s misunderstanding. Lower case “catholic” (universal) baptism works.

Could you explain to me, from a doctrinal perspective, why the Church would accept non-Catholic Baptism since they, the Catholic Church, is the true Church? I know they believe in only one Baptism, but since they are the true Church, it could follow that the previous baptism wasn’t ‘true’, either. I understand that all Christian believe in the Holy Trinity, but if they are not true otherwise…
Thanks

 

[cheezey]

If you mean Catholics that have a valid baptism (even if it was a Protestant baptism), then yes, you are right.

If you mean that you must have been baptized in a Catholic Church, then you are wrong.

To the OP: Why would you WANT to partake in the Eucharist if you are part of another denomination? Simply partake of the eucharist there where it means what you believe. If you feel strongly that you want to partake in Catholic Eucharist, and actually experience the True Presence, then why not become Catholic?

I’d like to, in my case, but there are hindrances, especially one of time. I’d like to partake, but I cannot til completion of RIC, or lying on my deathbed. Seems there could an in-between option.

 

[1ke]

I suggest you read the papal document Ecclesia de Eucharistia.

 

[benjohnson]

In order for one to receive Communion, one must be in a state of grace (I agree), believe in the True Presence (I agree), and be Catholic. I’m not sure if I agree with the last one. Shouldn’t a Christian of any denomination be okay to receive the Eucharist if they meet the first 2 requirements?

Othodox and confessional Lutherans also don’t allow others to commune with them. For Lutherans, the primary reason is to protect the person seeking communion - eating and drinking the true body and blood of Christ while not absolved of sin is very much to be avoided. The Bible says that the person “eats and drinks judgement” upon themselves.

It’s not a matter of being exclusive or anything like that - is a matter of protecting the souls of others.

 

[ElizMary]

Per Jim Blackburn of Catholic Answers:

"When considering the validity of non-Catholic baptism, the Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism instructs:
Baptism by immersion, or by pouring, together with the Trinitarian formula is, of itself, valid. Therefore, if the rituals, liturgical books, or established customs of a church or ecclesial community prescribe either of these ways of baptism, the sacrament is to be considered valid unless there are serious reasons for doubting that the minister has observed the regulations of his/her own community or church. (DE 95.a)"

 

[JerryZ]

Could you explain to me, from a doctrinal perspective, why the Church would accept non-Catholic Baptism since they, the Catholic Church, is the true Church? I know they believe in only one Baptism, but since they are the true Church, it could follow that the previous baptism wasn’t ‘true’, either. I understand that all Christian believe in the Holy Trinity, but if they are not true otherwise…
Thanks

The Baptism is a sacrament that puts a mark on your soul. When it is performed “validly” that with the proper form any one can perform it. It is the only sacrament that does not require Holy Orders to be administered. The Church does teach that a member of the laity should not do it unless grave matter is the cause. If the infant or person is dieing or in mortal danger and no priest is available then it is admissible.
Because even a laity can perform it if a religious community not in communion with the Catholic faith perform the baptism following the prescribed for then mother Church recognizes that baptism as valid.
Even if that faith does not believe that baptism is a sacrament or that it affects your soul the Catholic Church would still deem it valid because it is not the person that administers it but rather God.

That is the reason. Hope it’s clear

 

[PennyinCanada]

In order for one to receive Communion, one must be in a state of grace (I agree), believe in the True Presence (I agree), and be Catholic. I’m not sure if I agree with the last one. Shouldn’t a Christian of any denomination be okay to receive the Eucharist if they meet the first 2 requirements?

We won’t agree on how one comes into a ‘state of grace’.
A Catholic will say that all mortal sins must be confessed to a priest. Christians outside the Church would disagree, that they can confess directly to God.
What is a mortal sin? There would be disagreement on that point as well.

The Catholic Church is the guardian of the Eucharist and has the authority to say what one must do in order to receive. Christ said that if you eat and drink the Body and Blood of Christ unworthily, you bring condemnation upon yourself… That is taken very seriously by those who are the guardians, and they have concern for the people who receive.

We all could use a bit more ‘fear and trembling’ when approaching such a sacrament. Remember in the OT, when King David was returning with the Ark, there was much rejoicing and celebrating along the way. The Ark was transported on poles by oxen, and as they travelled on uneven ground, the Ark began to slip. A man who was along side the Ark put his hand up to steady it and he dropped dead on the spot. We have something much greater than the Ark, and we should do everything within our means to be pleasing to God when we approach to receive Him in the Eucharist. Fear and trembling is a good place to start, and not lukewarmness nor entitlement, nor a mind full of worldly distraction.

 

[sousley]

Could you explain to me, from a doctrinal perspective, why the Church would accept non-Catholic Baptism since they, the Catholic Church, is the true Church? I know they believe in only one Baptism, but since they are the true Church, it could follow that the previous baptism wasn’t ‘true’, either. I understand that all Christian believe in the Holy Trinity, but if they are not true otherwise…
Thanks

The issue of “one baptism for the forgiveness of sins” isn’t necessarily being viewed today as in the past. There were sects that “re-baptized” annually or at some other interval as well as “baptism by proxy” that intended to allocate baptisms to the souls of unbaptized dead. Some of that still goes one today. The Catholic Church rejects multiple baptisms for continual remission of sins (we have confession) and also being baptized on behalf of someone else. You’re asking about validity of baptism which is a different issue.

 

[ElizMary]

I’d like to, in my case, but there are hindrances, especially one of time. I’d like to partake, but I cannot til completion of RIC, or lying on my deathbed. Seems there could an in-between option.

I’m a relatively new Catholic (received in full communion May 2011). I remember wishing I could receive the Eucharist and not understanding why I couldn’t. I cannot tell you exactly what convinced me that I should not receive until I was in full communion–I just knew that I was willing to go to any lengths to be in full communion. I was (and am) hungry to receive Christ in a state of grace, as the RCC prescribes. Looking at it the way I do now, I wouldn’t have it any other way.

 

[cheezey]

The Bible says that the person “eats and drinks judgement” upon themselves.

It’s not a matter of being exclusive or anything like that - is a matter of protecting the souls of others.

! Corinthians:

23 The teaching I gave you is the same teaching I received from the Lord: On the night when the Lord Jesus was handed over to be killed, he took bread
24 and gave thanks for it. Then he broke the bread and said, “This is my body; it is for you. Do this to remember me.”
25 In the same way, after they ate, Jesus took the cup. He said, “This cup is the new agreement that is sealed with the blood of my death. When you drink this, do it to remember me.”
26 Every time you eat this bread and drink this cup you are telling others about the Lord’s death until he comes.
27 So a person who eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in a way that is not worthy of it will be guilty of sinning against the body and the blood of the Lord.
28 Look into your own hearts before you eat the bread and drink the cup,
29 because all who eat the bread and drink the cup without recognizing the body eat and drink judgment against themselves.

Again, some Non Catholics truly believe as the Catholics do on this and many other matters. Regarding this one matter, I **have **looked into my own heart. *I believe in the real presence of God. * I understand the Catholic Church’s RIC and its preparation for it. I understand the absolution necessary for it, too. If it is because the absolution MUST come from God’s direct apostle, the priest, THEN I’d understand better. I also understand the apostolic aspect of Church; I admit, I did not until not too long ago and it makes sense to me as truth. That I grew up familiar with the Protestant Church’s belief that absolution comes directly from God, doesn’t mean that I can’t have changed my mind to the Catholic Church on this and pretty much everything else…But again, I am meeting up with barricades to profess my faith properly, to even speak to someone who can guide me to their decision as to how my beliefs match the doctrine of the Church. Time is precious…

 

[sousley]

Also, there are no denominations that I’m aware of that retain a belief in all 7 sacraments. Most have made decisions to reject a certain number of tenets of the Catholic faith. To be in communion with the Catholic Church requires a profession in the tenets of faith common to Catholicism. So, for those that profess some agreement with Church doctrine but do not embrace other facets, they are not in communion with the Church by their own admission. While the Catholic Church desires all people to be united in one faith in Christ, some have made decisions to not pursue communion with the Church. So, unfortunately, the Church can’t invite them to partake in the Most Holy Eucharist because they haven’t embraced the teachings of the Church. But the same is true of Catholics who are not properly disposed to receive (mortal sin).

 

[cheezey]

Also, there are no denominations that I’m aware of that retain a belief in all 7 sacraments. Most have made decisions to reject a certain number of tenets of the Catholic faith. To be in communion with the 1.Catholic Church requires a profession in the tenets of faith common to Catholicism. So, **2.for those that profess some agreement with Church doctrine but do not embrace other facets, they are not in communion with the Church **3.by their own admission. While the Catholic Church desires all people to be united in one faith in Christ, some have made decisions to not pursue communion with the Church. So, unfortunately, the Church can’t invite them to partake in the Most Holy Eucharist 4.because they haven’t embraced the teachings of the Church. But the same is true of Catholics who are not properly disposed to receive (mortal sin).

1-as far as I understand - and admittedly, a discussion is in order to be sure (if ever it happens) - I have.
2.-Doesn’t the profession of all facets begin with me, as in, I believe this (all of this) with all of my heart
3. see above, my admission is that I am professing!!
4. I have but not formally.

 

[ElizMary]

! Time is precious…

Talk to the priest where you attend Mass. In our parish, under special circumstances, we (RCIA team) meet with the candidate for a “fast track” catechism. We study the U.S. Catechism for Adults (great book!). We’re talking 2-3 months. Maybe your parish will determine that you face extenuating circumstances.

pace de bene!