Communion at Protestant churches

[jmcrae]

We can have no way of knowing what that Bishop was thinking, but if the events occurred prior to the mid-1990s, it’s possible that he was unclear about who is and isn’t allowed to participate in Holy Communion in the Catholic Church - there was a school of thought during the period from the Council until the publication of the Catechism (which removed all doubt) that any baptized person can receive Holy Communion in the Catholic Church, merely by virtue of being a baptized person.

Vestiges of this idea remain among certain groups, and one does still encounter them from time to time. There is a certain logic to it, but the Vatican has made it very clear since at least the early 1990s that only Catholics are supposed to receive Holy Communion in the Catholic Church. (I remember even in the late 1980s - from about 1986 onward - that people were starting to talk about this issue and to emphasize that one should have received at least one’s First Confession before beginning to receive Holy Communion in the Church, and ideally for adults, Confirmation and Profession of Faith, as well.)

 

[Grace_Seeker]

We can have no way of knowing what that Bishop was thinking, but if the events occurred prior to the mid-1990s…

Bless your heart for considering even the remotest possibility that I might have still been in college in the 1990s.

Yes, surely I am referring to an entirely other generation.

 

[BrewMax]

I don’t see him preached hate. He is merely saying that Catholics cannot received communion in Protestant Communion service. The belief system is completely different. Most mainstream Protestant believe in the Symbolic meaning while Catholics believe in the Real Presence of the Holy Eucharist.

The Protestants lack valid Holy Orders to consecrate the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of the Lord.

I am quite aware of the beliefs of Catholics toward Protestants.

 

[jmcrae]

I am quite aware of the beliefs of Catholics toward Protestants.

Since the majority of Protestants have no intention of confecting the Eucharist in the first place, I don’t see what difference it would make to them that we don’t believe their Eucharist to be the real thing. They view it as purely a symbol, anyway - they don’t even believe that they are actually consuming the body and blood of Jesus Christ in their services of Holy Communion - if a Catholic were to come along and tell them that it isn’t really Jesus, they would be puzzled at him for stating the obvious in that accusing tone of voice long before they would take any kind of offense - they don’t think it’s really Jesus, anyway - it wouldn’t even occur to them that maybe it should be.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Since the majority of Protestants have no intention of confecting the Eucharist in the first place, I don’t see what difference it would make to them that we don’t believe their Eucharist to be the real thing. They view it as purely a symbol, anyway - they don’t even believe that they are actually consuming the body and blood of Jesus Christ in their services of Holy Communion - if a Catholic were to come along and tell them that it isn’t really Jesus, they would be puzzled at him for stating the obvious in that accusing tone of voice long before they would take any kind of offense - they don’t think it’s really Jesus, anyway - it wouldn’t even occur to them that maybe it should be.

Hey. When you’re right, you’re right. And you’re right, it wouldn’t occur to me that maybe it should be, because as you said, I don’t think it is.

That doesn’t mean that we don’t believe that we aren’t really experiencing communion with Christ, we do. We just don’t find it necessary to have his physical body present to experience his real presence. But, I see your point, that it isn’t the “real” eucharist from a Catholic’s perspective either and I shouldn’t expect you to see it that way.

Now, comes the follow-up question. Since it actually is what it is, regardless of what we believe it is, should the other’s persons views of it serve as an impediment for sharing in one another’s experiences of partaking of the elements? If you can recognize as valid my baptism and I yours, and if ecumenical “love feasts” can be approved, why cannot we not simialry share in communion together?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Because a ‘love feast’ is not the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Because, no matter how much we may love each other, when it comes down to the reception of Jesus Christ, body and blood, soul and divinity, at the sacrifice of the Mass, both Scripture and Tradition, guided by the Holy Spirit, have maintained from the time of the apostles that only those who are baptized Catholic Christians (or the ‘exceptions’ already noted, in 'exceptional circumstances already noted) who are in a state of grace should be receiving that Eucharist as a sign of our unity in Christ as members of His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, by ‘eating His flesh and drinking His blood’ as He requested.

No matter how much we ‘share’ as Christians, Protestand and Catholic, we do not share that unity. You are not a baptized Catholic Christian who believes in the Eucharist as the Real Presence of Christ. . .so your ‘reception’ of that Eucharist would be a false ‘claim’ to that unity. You are not in ‘full communion’ with Christ’s church. You do not believe that the Eucharist is His Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity. So why would you want to receive it?

This is not ‘our views impeding your actions’. This is the heart of the matter. . .either you ‘believe’ as we believe (and are commanded by God Himself), or you want to believe as ‘you’ believe, yet still participate in something which you do NOT believe in. This is what comes of a false ‘ecumenism’ which sees as the ‘highest good’ a ‘symbol’ of unity, not the actual unity itself. You don’t want the real unity which would involve your conversion to the Church–what you want is for US to ‘permit’ you to ‘share’ the Eucharist without your having to change your own views or beliefs in any way, because ‘unless you share, you aren’t really acting like Christians.’ “You are denying us something we SHOULD HAVE”.

IOW, you’re attempting to turn around the facts of the case: Catholics believe that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, and that our ‘state of grace’ reception of this is a COMMUNION of ourselves, as members of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, with Christ. . .into our ‘denial’ of ‘fellow baptized Christians’ of a ‘gesture of unity’ by ‘refusing’ them to ‘partake’ of ‘communion’ simply because they have ‘different beliefs’.

This is not said in anger, or without respect --I do understand your ‘point of view’ but because it lacks fullness (not through your deliberate fault) in your not fully comprehending what the Eucharist IS and MEANS, not ‘just’ to Catholics but to ‘all’, you have made an understandable error in equating what YOU believe ‘a symbol’ into something that ‘can be’ shared AS a symbol.

It cannot.

God bless.

 

[jmcrae]

Hey. When you’re right, you’re right. And you’re right, it wouldn’t occur to me that maybe it should be, because as you said, I don’t think it is.

That doesn’t mean that we don’t believe that we aren’t really experiencing communion with Christ, we do. We just don’t find it necessary to have his physical body present to experience his real presence. But, I see your point, that it isn’t the “real” eucharist from a Catholic’s perspective either and I shouldn’t expect you to see it that way.

Now, comes the follow-up question. Since it actually is what it is, regardless of what we believe it is, should the other’s persons views of it serve as an impediment for sharing in one another’s experiences of partaking of the elements? If you can recognize as valid my baptism and I yours, and if ecumenical “love feasts” can be approved, why cannot we not simialry share in communion together?

Precisely because it isn’t our belief that makes it what it is - this is not an exercise in positive thinking. It is what it is, and we believe it because it is true. Because it is true, it would be bad for someone to receive Jesus, thinking that he was eating a piece of bread.

While I understand and sympathize with the attitude of some, who say that it would be good for a Protestant to unknowingly receive Jesus into his body, since Jesus is all-good and would do him no harm, the stance of the Church is that we don’t let that happen - we don’t let people get tricked into participating in the Sacraments, even if they are willing victims of such treachery.

Instead, we make sure that when people are having this close encounter with Christ, that they are fully prepared (as much as possible) for the experience, by knowing what is going on, by having entered into the Catholic life in their daily activities, by having confessed their sins to a priest beforehand and having received the Absolution, by being in a state of grace, and by being properly disposed, having fasted beforehand, and having participated with their whole heart and mind in the readings, the homily, and the prayers leading up to the reception of Holy Communion at Mass - again, as much as possible - nothing is ever perfect, but we know what our goal is, and we do everything possible to achieve it, and where possible, we avoid those things that detract from it - if someone is manifestly not Catholic, he is not properly disposed to receive the Eucharist in the Catholic Church.

The reason Catholics are not allowed to participate in Protestant services of holy communion is in order to avoid any appearance of equivalency between Holy Mass and Protestant services of holy communion.

 

[BrewMax]

Since the majority of Protestants have no intention of confecting the Eucharist in the first place, I don’t see what difference it would make to them that we don’t believe their Eucharist to be the real thing. They view it as purely a symbol, anyway - they don’t even believe that they are actually consuming the body and blood of Jesus Christ in their services of Holy Communion - if a Catholic were to come along and tell them that it isn’t really Jesus, they would be puzzled at him for stating the obvious in that accusing tone of voice long before they would take any kind of offense - they don’t think it’s really Jesus, anyway - it wouldn’t even occur to them that maybe it should be.

You genuinely do hate Protestants. You hate the way in which Protestants question and refute un-Biblical Catholic doctrine and dogma. You can’t see anything beyond your Catholic blinders because you don’t believe anything exists outside of them. Do you believe that God himself is encompassed by the Catholic church too?

 

[Mannyfit75]

You genuinely do hate Protestants. You hate the way in which Protestants question and refute un-Biblical Catholic doctrine and dogma. You can’t see anything beyond your Catholic blinders because you don’t believe anything exists outside of them. Do you believe that God himself is encompassed by the Catholic church too?

He doesn’t hate. He just dislike the Protestant’s view of theology as oppose to that of the Catholic approach of theology concerning Divine Revelation…

Our practices are Biblical my friend. You don’t see that way, because you aren’t Catholic. You left remember?

 

[viper78912]

QUOTE=Tantum ergo;2882602]Because a ‘love feast’ is not the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Because, no matter how much we may love each other, when it comes down to the reception of Jesus Christ, body and blood, soul and divinity, at the sacrifice of the Mass, both Scripture and Tradition, guided by the Holy Spirit, have maintained from the time of the apostles that only those who are baptized Catholic Christians (or the ‘exceptions’ already noted, in 'exceptional circumstances already noted) who are in a state of grace should be receiving that Eucharist as a sign of our unity in Christ as members of His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, by ‘eating His flesh and drinking His blood’ as He requested.

No matter how much we ‘share’ as Christians, Protestand and Catholic, we do not share that unity. You are not a baptized Catholic Christian who believes in the Eucharist as the Real Presence of Christ. . .so your ‘reception’ of that Eucharist would be a false ‘claim’ to that unity. You are not in ‘full communion’ with Christ’s church. You do not believe that the Eucharist is His Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity. So why would you want to receive it?

This is not ‘our views impeding your actions’. This is the heart of the matter. . .either you ‘believe’ as we believe (and are commanded by God Himself), or you want to believe as ‘you’ believe, yet still participate in something which you do NOT believe in. This is what comes of a false ‘ecumenism’ which sees as the ‘highest good’ a ‘symbol’ of unity, not the actual unity itself. You don’t want the real unity which would involve your conversion to the Church–what you want is for US to ‘permit’ you to ‘share’ the Eucharist without your having to change your own views or beliefs in any way, because ‘unless you share, you aren’t really acting like Christians.’ “You are denying us something we SHOULD HAVE”.

IOW, you’re attempting to turn around the facts of the case: Catholics believe that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, and that our ‘state of grace’ reception of this is a COMMUNION of ourselves, as members of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, with Christ. . .into our ‘denial’ of ‘fellow baptized Christians’ of a ‘gesture of unity’ by ‘refusing’ them to ‘partake’ of ‘communion’ simply because they have ‘different beliefs’.

This is not said in anger, or without respect --I do understand your ‘point of view’ but because it lacks fullness (not through your deliberate fault) in your not fully comprehending what the Eucharist IS and MEANS, not ‘just’ to Catholics but to ‘all’, you have made an understandable error in equating what YOU believe ‘a symbol’ into something that ‘can be’ shared AS a symbol.

It cannot.

God bless.
Earlier, Iraneaus used to believe that, if Jesus Christ is inside the Church, Satan is outside. Hence ‘excommunicate!’. The issue of leaving the Church and excommunication has been resolved by Pope Benedict XVI.In his book, “Journey Into Easter”, based on a retreat given to Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger has clarified, on page 141,”No one has the right to excommunicate.”
However, St. Augustine excommunicated himself before his death, to experience the travails of the excommunicate.
The foreword to Pope John Paul II’s eulogy was written by Billy Graham.
Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have both prayed in the mosques. Pope Benedict has kissed the Holy Quran.
CCC 816 explains that there is truth in other religions.

 

[swariffin]

I have often heard that Protestants should not receive holy Communion at Catholic Mass, and totaly agree that they should not…But is it permissable for us Catholics to participate in Protestant communion services???

Dear Greg,

The Protestant do not believe that the bread and wine in the holy communion becomes the true body and blood of Jesus Christ. So, the Catholic cannot participate in the Protestant communion services due to (a) the bread and wine in such communion are still bread and wine, and (b) the communioun is not in unity with the Pope and the local RCC Bishop.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Dear Greg,

The Protestant do not believe that the bread and wine in the holy communion becomes the true body and blood of Jesus Christ. So, the Catholic cannot participate in the Protestant communion services due to (a) the bread and wine in such communion are still bread and wine, and (b) the communioun is not in unity with the Pope and the local RCC Bishop.

That’s right because we know that (a) Catholics are not allowed to eat bread that is just bread or drink wine that is just wine and since that is all that Protestant communion is, they cannot partake of it; and (b) the Catholic church does not recognize any kinship to protestants as they know that when Catholics get to heaven there is a big sign on the door that says “No Protestants Allowed”. So since we aren’t going to have any oneness in heaven it would be wrong to pretend that we had any oneness on earth – that’s straight from the Matthew where Jesus taught us to pray “thy kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven”.

(At least that’s what I hear you saying.)

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Why didn’t you respond to MY post, Grace, instead of to one which was ‘later’? Mine gave the explanations you sought.

I repeat, this is **not ** the mean, bigoted Catholics attempting to deny the poor loving Protestants of ‘something’ which either of us ‘deserve’.

You know, if this matter were only that of symbolism, we would be delighted to have not only Protestants but any people ‘receive’.

And if this were only a matter of ‘Catholic practices’, like having statues (these not being ‘necessary’ for salvation but simple pious gestures), again, we’d be delighted to have all ‘partake’ and act.

But this is not something that ‘we’ dreamed up as a litmus test or a special ‘reward’ for ‘Catholics only.’

This action, this Eucharist, was given us by Christ. The rules involving who partakes, and how to take it worthily (as taking it unworthily is a grave sin) were given us by Christ and His apostles and have been held throughout the Christian era as such.

Catholics do not ‘deny the Eucharist’. Christ asks those who wish to be in ‘communion’ with Him to ‘do what He tells them’. So in order to receive that communion, you must do what He tells YOU. Which is, to become a member of His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, to believe in Him and His teachings, and to be in a state of grace to receive Him, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity.

If you have a problem with Catholics ‘denying the Eucharist to Protestants’ you are really having the problem with God Himself, because we Catholics are obeying HIM who is perfect Justice and Love.

 

[jmcrae]

That’s right because we know that (a) Catholics are not allowed to eat bread that is just bread or drink wine that is just wine and since that is all that Protestant communion is, they cannot partake of it;

In a previous post, I said,

The reason Catholics are not allowed to participate in Protestant services of holy communion is in order to avoid any appearance of equivalency between Holy Mass and Protestant services of holy communion.

and (b) the Catholic church does not recognize any kinship to protestants as they know that when Catholics get to heaven there is a big sign on the door that says “No Protestants Allowed”.

There will, in fact, be no Protestants in Heaven - they will have all converted to the Catholic faith either here on earth, or during their purification in Purgatory.

So since we aren’t going to have any oneness in heaven it would be wrong to pretend that we had any oneness on earth – that’s straight from the Matthew where Jesus taught us to pray “thy kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven”.

(At least that’s what I hear you saying.)

The Catholic Church is God’s kingdom on earth. That’s why Jesus appointed St. Peter and his successors to be its “key holder” and “chief shepherd” here on earth. (Matthew 16:18-19 and John 21:15-19). But if we are not in union with Peter’s successor, then we have no part (or only partial part) in God’s earthly kingdom.

Question: If we are not citizens of God’s earthly kingdom, can we (realistically) expect to be part of God’s heavenly kingdom?

 

[jmcrae]

PS: The Catholic Church does have love feasts, from time to time - they consist of a great deal more substance than a tiny piece of bread and a thimble of drink - and all are welcome to attend them - there is one lady at our parish who even drags homeless people in off the street to come and partake of them, and we all admire her for doing this - at ours, we do two whole roast pigs, with mountains of rice, mashed potatoes, and vegetables, a keg of beer, six kinds of wine, and every kind of liquor, and whatever people choose to bring with them to share.

After the pigs have been reduced to bone and scraps, we turn on the karaoke machine, and we sing and dance into the wee hours of the morning.

 

[swariffin]

That’s right because we know that (a) Catholics are not allowed to eat bread that is just bread or drink wine that is just wine and since that is all that Protestant communion is, they cannot partake of it; and (b) the Catholic church does not recognize any kinship to protestants as they know that when Catholics get to heaven there is a big sign on the door that says “No Protestants Allowed”. So since we aren’t going to have any oneness in heaven it would be wrong to pretend that we had any oneness on earth – that’s straight from the Matthew where Jesus taught us to pray “thy kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven”.

(At least that’s what I hear you saying.)

Dear Grace Seeker,

I apologize that I did not make my self clear. What I mean is that the bread and wine the Catholic eat and drink in a Protestant communion will not become a Eucharist for the Catholics. Physically the Catholics may attend and eat/drink the bread and wine in the Protestant communion, but it will not be a sacrament to such Catholics. Thanks for remining me.

 

[BrewMax]

In a previous post, I said,

There will, in fact, be no Protestants in Heaven - they will have all converted to the Catholic faith either here on earth, or during their purification in Purgatory.

The Catholic Church is God’s kingdom on earth. That’s why Jesus appointed St. Peter and his successors to be its “key holder” and “chief shepherd” here on earth. (Matthew 16:18-19 and John 21:15-19). But if we are not in union with Peter’s successor, then we have no part (or only partial part) in God’s earthly kingdom.

Question: If we are not citizens of God’s earthly kingdom, can we (realistically) expect to be part of God’s heavenly kingdom?

You are extremely self righteous and also wrong.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

You are extremely self righteous and also wrong.

As I said once earlier, someone has to be the first one to be nice. Give jmcrae a break. She’s just representing her own position. She represents it strongly and assertively, but don’t we all when we feel strongly about something. I don’t see her as attacking us protestants (I assume you are a protestant, I am), and certainly she hasn’t ever called me any names (other than perhaps silently thinking how dense I am). We can agree with it, ignore it, or disagree with it. But we don’t have to become disagreable over it.

I concur that I think jmcrae is wrong regarding protestants becoming catholic in heaven (I doubt that there will be such labels at all). But I don’t see evidence to call her self-righteous. Might you have gone from critiquing a person’s posts to being critical of a person?

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Why didn’t you respond to MY post, Grace, instead of to one which was ‘later’? Mine gave the explanations you sought.

I was rather busy with responding to a fire when you posted. When I came back I didn’t have the time or energy for a long post. I made a short and simple comment on one post rather than engage in a long discussion on a more involved one. Sorry, if I offended you by not choosing your post as the one post I took the time to respond to. If it makes you feel any better, I was willing to basically accept your explanation on face value. Just to be sure you aren’t feeling slighted on this one, again accepting most of it as simply an expression of your position, I have the following comments on one part of your post:

Catholics do not ‘deny the Eucharist’.

Of course not. I am not suggesting that you do or should.

Christ asks those who wish to be in ‘communion’ with Him to ‘do what He tells them’. So in order to receive that communion, you must do what He tells YOU.

Agreed. Which by inference means that each church, each congregation, each individual must reach a sense of what that is instruction is, and is ultimately responsible for it himself. If he finds that he cannot agree with the teachings of his church, he must then discern whether (in all probability) he has more to learn in order to better understand the position of his church and better be in harmony with what Christ taught, or if he is ready to lay aside the teachings of his church has having become in error (perhaps through the accumulations of extra-biblical teachings over time) and for that reason face the jeers and even condemnation of his former ecclesiastical authorities in order to remain true to what he understands Christ to have actually taught. He still must do what CHRIST tells him, rather than what the church tells him.

Which is, to become a member of His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, to believe in Him and His teachings,

Which is something that I think is true for many that you think it is not true for. We simply are going to disagree as to who is and is not included in the One, Holy, catholic and apostolic Church.

and to be in a state of grace to receive Him, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity.

Are you saying that you receive the soul and divinity of Jesus when you partake the eucharistic elements? Maybe you just mean that because you actually physically eat the body of Chist that all of the rest is contained in them and thus you have internalized that as you have internalized his body. Surely you don’t mean that Christ’s soul and divinity is incorporated into your life?

we Catholics are obeying HIM who is perfect Justice and Love.

You Catholics believe that you are obeying him. Whether you actually are or are not, or if it is even as important as we make it out to be, has yet to be fully revealed. For now we only know in part, as in a mirror darkly, it us not yet been made fully known.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Dear Grace,
First, I hope that there were no injuries or other losses in the fire. God bless all firefighters.

Second, I’m not offended that you didn’t respond more thoroughly to my post, only surprised (not knowing that you were tired out from firefighting and opted to post a more generalized response to a later post) that your option was, at that time, to present not the response you just did above, but more an ‘emoo’ of ‘feeling’ that the Catholics were ‘shutting out the Protestants’, even dragging heaven into it. It is this continual ‘harping’ on ‘hurt feelings’ and expressions of being ‘shut out’, marginalized, and otherwise ill treated by Catholics which is objectionable–not because hurting feelings is ‘a good thing’ (it is not) but because it is not the ‘feelings’ which are the root of the discussion. If I have to hold my child tightly to keep him from running into the street into the path of a car, his FEELINGS are going to be hurt and if he is young enough, he may not fully understand for quite some time that this restraint kept him from being physically badly hurt. But you would certainly not suggest that I refrain from stopping him, even though you KNOW his feelings ARE going to be hurt, would you??

Third, as JM and others note, this is not merely an ‘expression of opinion’. If the subject is only to be relegated to ‘your Protestant opinion’ and ‘my Catholic opinion’, as if there were no absolute ‘truth’ to the matter, there will never be a consensus or unity, in this or any other subject. There ‘must’ be an absolute truth. You may ‘believe’ that ‘your opinion’ is, if not absolute truth, ‘closer to it’ than mine, but in the end you must acknowledge that there is something ‘absolute’ and right’, else there is no need even for DISCUSSION of this. If there is no absolute truth, then as a Protestant you would simply accept the ‘Catholic position’ (while disagreeing) without making any attempt at all to bring Catholics to your ‘Protestant’ position of ‘the Catholic Eucharist should ‘include Protestants’ as a gesture of unity, as ‘we Protestants’ for the most part offer ‘inclusive communion’ to ‘any’ Christian. Because unless there is something absolute, then how ‘we’ worship and how ‘you’ worship would just be perfectly ‘allowable’ differences in style or comprehension.
That being said, you obviously DO believe that your Protestant position is closer to absolute truth, or you may say, closer to what God ‘wants’ which you appear to believe is unity under the guise of ‘opening’ the Catholic eucharist to all ‘Christians’, regardless of those Christians’ own beliefs of what the Catholic Eucharist is. And we Catholics believe that our Catholic position (which I thank you for accepting my explanation on face value) is closer to the absolute truth of what God wants from us, which we believe is unity of all Christians through membership in His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, belief in that Church’s teachings, being in a state of grace to receive the Eucharist which we further believe is His Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, the nonbloody sacrifice on Calvary, that self-same Last Supper, and the commandment given to us in John 6.

I’ll post further to a specific of yours which troubles me in the next post.