We all have certain gifts. Admonishing sinners is best left for people who are compassionate and know what they are doing.“Admonish the sinner” is one of the Spiritual Works of Mercy and something we should be doing if our family members or close friends are obstinately persisting in manifest grave sin. In fact it is sometimes incumbent upon us to say something and to remain silent would be sinful.
True. I myself am not receiving The Sacraments since I was made aware of my invalid marriage and I will not until the situation is resolved satisfactorily, even when some people have told me to “just take communion” I take the matter very seriously.And we should pray for all those not properly disposed to receive, and for those of us who are properly disposed to receive the courage to softly remind relatives and friends of the sanctity of the Eucharist without judging them for any grave sins that we are aware of their involvement in, including adultery, fornication, contraception, etc…the disposition to receive by the intoxicated man may have been far more acceptable than that of our close relatives, friends, or even ourselves.
If there is no public protest, it is nobody’s affair, on any level of Church.Who’s affair is it then?
It is not true that they have zero spiritual value. See the words of warning about I worthily receiving.
Public protest? Like the op protesting it?If there is no public protest, it is nobody’s affair, on any level of Church.
What metric is there for gauging worthiness? How does one prove themselves to others?
Generally one can tell or smell a drunk. And an intoxicated person cannot really reconcile. It is more obvious by sight, odor behavior etc than say adultery or birth control.If there is no public protest, it is nobody’s affair, on any level of Church.
What metric is there for gauging worthiness? How does one prove themselves to others?
But, being how we don’t know the extent of this man’s alcohol abuse. Is there a possibility that this man’s alcohol use has expanded to a dependency…a physiological need, a psychological illness? If this was the case then would his culpability for his alcohol use be lessened? And would he be in a manifest sin to receive holy communion?Generally one can tell or smell a drunk. And an intoxicated person cannot really reconcile. It is more obvious by sight, odor behavior etc than say adultery or birth control.
Most places have laws against public intoxication anyway. I suppose the same criteria could be used.
But really my point is that it is the pastor’s responsibility and perhaps he should be notified.
Public protest? Like the op protesting it?
How do you reconcile this statement with canon 915. Obviously SOMEONE has the authority if in canon law it states people can “not be admitted”
I don’t know canon law and there’s a good chance I never will (why would I?) but generally speaking, 99% of sins that would bar a person from communion aren’t sins that can be supervised in anyway. The diocese isn’t going to hire a Mod Squad to dictate who is and isn’t worthy to receive. There would inevitably be mistakes made, and this would cause exceedingly more damage than any damage saved by keeping people from the Sacrament who shouldn’t be receiving it. I’m told the instances where a particular individual cannot receive are quite rare and circumstantial. For everything else, including those that are not permitted by moral law to receive, it’s not something that is supervised or monitored in anyway.Generally one can tell or smell a drunk. And an intoxicated person cannot really reconcile. It is more obvious by sight, odor behavior etc than say adultery or birth control.
Most places have laws against public intoxication anyway. I suppose the same criteria could be used.
But really my point is that it is the pastor’s responsibility and perhaps he should be notified.
Those would be questions to be handled in the confessional. It is quite a modern phenomenon to receive as often as folks do these days. In fact other cultures don’t. The Hispanics in parishes often stay seated in the Spanish language mass.But, being how we don’t know the extent of this man’s alcohol abuse. Is there a possibility that this man’s alcohol use has expanded to a dependency…a physiological need, a psychological illness? If this was the case then would his culpability for his alcohol use be lessened? And would he be in a manifest sin to receive holy communion?
No, I don’t mean a mob forming from inside the Church. I mean the individual in question protesting against the Church (for example, a wayward priest or political figure). A controversial figure might be explicitly denied communion by that bishop (or by Rome itself). Queen Elizabeth I, for example, who was excommunicated.Public protest? Like the op protesting it?
Yes, it is quite modern, excluding the earliest centuries, and frequent reception is also encouraged by modern Popes and more than one canonized mystic based on private revelation.Those would be questions to be handled in the confessional. It is quite a modern phenomenon to receive as often as folks do these days. In fact other cultures don’t. The Hispanics in parishes often stay seated in the Spanish language mass.
Worth noting that it is an obligation to attend mass but the precept of the church is to receive at least once a year. Not coincidental is the instruction to confess at least once a year as well. Curious, what the rate of confession for those Mystics, saints and popes… Probably as frequent as Sunday reception of the Eucharist. And most certainly SOBER!!!Yes, it is quite modern, excluding the earliest centuries, and frequent reception is also encouraged by modern Popes and more than one canonized mystic based on private revelation.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t the touchstone for considering drunkenness a mortal sin not physical impairment nor odor, but the loss of the ability to reason? The CCC doesn’t define drunkeness, but the Summa has a pretty thorough treatment on the matter. See: newadvent.org/summa/3150.htm. That along with the usual conditions: full knowledge and deliberate consent. Hardly objective criteria, and not a judgment I would feel comfortable making.FWIW, from what I saw his girlfriend had the keys. And as far as what I observed, besides all the telltales signs of physical impairment the guy ***reeked ***of booze. But I suppose it’s possible that a drink was spilled on him.
This is a good question!So, an obviously drunk man sat next to me at Midnight Mass. He went up and did receive The Eucharist. I don’t know what the canon law is on this sort of thing. And even if I was sure that he was intending to consume Our Lord while in a state of mortal sin, I’m not sure if/how I should act in this situation.
thoughts?
While this may apply in some situations, I do not see its bearing on this topic.“Admonish the sinner” is one of the Spiritual Works of Mercy and something we should be doing if our family members or close friends are obstinately persisting in manifest grave sin. In fact it is sometimes incumbent upon us to say something and to remain silent would be sinful.
This is a good question!
Let me see if I can rephrase your Op in such a way so as avoid all the MYOB advice you’ve been getting up to this point and get some definitive answers instead.
*…Hey C.A.F. members reading this thread. Some of you must know what the official Church teaching is. Maybe some actual clergy reading as well. So I’ve come here seeking your help. I’m just some anonymous dude sitting at home on Saturday afternoon. I’ve had a bit of a binge drink - almost two bottles of red wine. I’m intoxicated to well over the legal limit so I walk to Mass. I take part in the liturgy (which I know and understand because I’m catholic) but I slur the words a bit every now and then. So I have two questions;
- In the absence of other information about me, does anything I have told you so far* prevent me from receiving Holy Communion?
- And if you knew for a fact that something in canon law DID warn against me taking Communion, would you - should you - sit by and do nothing?
And mine!Based on my understanding of church teaching.
- No.
- Yes.
It seems that Americans have been trained well in the art of rationalization. Nothing is their fault. Other cultures seem to be more serious in their approach to communion but we have nothing other than the shorter communion lines to show this.Those would be questions to be handled in the confessional. It is quite a modern phenomenon to receive as often as folks do these days. In fact other cultures don’t. The Hispanics in parishes often stay seated in the Spanish language mass.
I saw a drunk younger man in the parking lot at Midnight Mass. He came with some friend and his own father and mother were outside the parish and wouldn’t let him in. The father was screaming at the top of his lungs that he would beat his a**. I couldn’t believe these people were shouting and threatening each other in the parking lot of a Church, moments from the start of Midnight Mass. I anticipated the cops coming, but it turns out some other friend showed up and got him in the car, but then the guy tried getting out of the car and fell and was lying in the parking lot crying. I felt embarrassed for the parents, but I’m glad he didn’t make it inside the Church. It sure would have been a bad deal for him if he did.So, an obviously drunk man sat next to me at Midnight Mass. He went up and did receive The Eucharist. I don’t know what the canon law is on this sort of thing. And even if I was sure that he was intending to consume Our Lord while in a state of mortal sin, I’m not sure if/how I should act in this situation.
thoughts?