Elderly Father-in-Law: Not Catholic receiving communion [edited]

[AndrewMSFO]

We have an interesting problem, my father-in-law is now living with us and he is 90 years old with some dementia (not a lot but enough to be noticed from time to time-- like he was incapable of managing his financial affairs requiring us to legally take over things…bills not getting paid, bounced checks stuff like that)…

The problem is when we take him to Mass… he is technically Methodist, but we are Catholic.

When it comes to communion he keeps going up for communion. He doesn’t seem to understand that he cannot go even when told.

So what should we do? We really cannot leave him at the house alone, and he seems to like to go to Mass.

 

[PhilotheaZ]

If he seems to have (or desire) a “Catholic” faith in the Eucharist, isn’t it possible that this would be a great time to ask him if he would like to officially join the Catholic Church? It’s never too late. Many people are received into the Church in their golden years.

Talk to your pastor first. Ask him what it would entail. For a 90-year-old, I doubt that a full RCIA program would be required, possibly a bit of individual instruction, adapted to his level of understanding.

This would also make him eligible for the Sacraments of Reconciliation and Anointing of the Sick, which are so important.

 

[EvelynEVF]

While i realize that it is not correct for non-communicating persons to approach the priest for a blessing during Communion, perhaps the priest (if you are in a small enough parish that he would know who you are, and if this is the local custom) would be willing to bless your father in law when he approaches for communion. Given his mental state, perhaps this would allow you to keep him safe and supervised, and prevent an outburst if he felt ignored or shamed if he were denied the sacrament.

 

[benedictgal]

While i realize that it is not correct for non-communicating persons to approach the priest for a blessing during Communion, perhaps the priest (if you are in a small enough parish that he would know who you are, and if this is the local custom) would be willing to bless your father in law when he approaches for communion. Given his mental state, perhaps this would allow you to keep him safe and supervised, and prevent an outburst if he felt ignored or shamed if he were denied the sacrament.

Evelyn, even though you mean well, and please do not think that I am unfeeling or uncharitable, you should not recommend something that Rome has already said should not be done for the time being. It has nothing to do with the local custom. As the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament noted:

1. The liturgical blessing of the Holy Mass is properly given to each and to all at the conclusion of the Mass, just a few moments subsequent to the distribution of Holy Communion.

1. Lay people, within the context of Holy Mass, are unable to confer blessings. These blessings, rather, are the competence of the priest (cf. Ecclesia de Mysterio, Notitiae 34 (15 Aug. 1997), art. 6, § 2; Canon 1169, § 2; and Roman Ritual De Benedictionibus (1985), n. 18).

1. Furthermore, the laying on of a hand or hands — which has its own sacramental significance, inappropriate here — by those distributing Holy Communion, in substitution for its reception, is to be explicitly discouraged.

1. The Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio n. 84, “forbids any pastor, for whatever reason to pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry”. To be feared is that any form of blessing in substitution for communion would give the impression that the divorced and remarried have been returned, in some sense, to the status of Catholics in good standing.

1. In a similar way, for others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law, the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing. This would include non-Catholics and those envisaged in can. 915 (i.e., those under the penalty of excommunication or interdict, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin).

Rather than encourage a practice that should not be employed in the first place, I would suggest that, after Mass, the family approach the pastor and ask him to bless the elderly father-in-law. The other option is for one relative to stay with him while the other one goes to receive Holy Communion. When that person comes back, then the one who stayed with him would then go and receive.

Nonetheless, we should not be promoting practices that Rome has said, for the time being, should not be used. The solution offered in the second post is a lot more plausable.

 

[LilyM]

I don’t know that someone suffering from dementia would necessarily make a suitable candidate for RCIA or conversion.

As far as communion goes - firstly have a quiet word to the pastor so that he (and any EMHCs) know the situation. Secondly - each of you should go up for communion separately, one of you staying at all times with FIL, so that he doesn’t just ‘follow the crowd’.

 

[EvelynEVF]

I apologize for not realizing that there were always two adults with the father in law, so one could very well stay with him and keep him in the pew. My mother has dementia, and thinks she is Catholic though she isn’t. The best we’ve ever come up with is to warn the priest so that if she insists on getting in line and coming up for Communion, he doesn’t give her the Eucharist. It is the local custom to give a blessing, so she doesn’t stand out and doesn’t wonder aloud (loudly) why she is the only one in the pew. I would be concerned that without some gesture, a priest would just stand there and look at her, which could provoke an outburst. In my case there is not really a solid solution, but if you have someone who can stay with him, then you do.

If I were part of a parish where they follow the rule, I would certainly consult the priest. It’s hard to get experienced adult daycare for an hour here and an hour there. I suppose I might be able to latch her on to another daily Mass goer, but in such a small group she might get confused.

Hmm. Well, Benedictgal, you’ve at least got me thinking. I have been taking advantage of a loophole because it is convenient for me, and I need to reconsider that.

 

[Holland]

1. In a similar way, for others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law, the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing. This would include non-Catholics and those envisaged in can. 915 (i.e., those under the penalty of excommunication or interdict, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin).

Gosh, I didn’t know that. When a non-catholic person approaches the priest during Communion and the priest traces the sign of the cross on their forehead, is that considered a “blessing”?

 

[benedictgal]

1. In a similar way, for others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law, the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing. This would include non-Catholics and those envisaged in can. 915 (i.e., those under the penalty of excommunication or interdict, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin).

Gosh, I didn’t know that. When a non-catholic person approaches the priest during Communion and the priest traces the sign of the cross on their forehead, is that considered a “blessing”?

Yes because he is doing a ritual that should not be done in the first place.

 

[bpbasilphx]

When I was at the Eastern Orthodox Foundation in Pennsylvania, there were residents who, let’s just say, functioned on an entirely different level of reality.

The Metropolitan said we had pastoral responsibility towards them.

IF they attended Liturgy in our chapel (which was beautifully adorned) and IF they came up of their own will to Communion, they were to be Communed.

I think this is the principle that applies to your FIL.

 

[PhilotheaZ]

When I was at the Eastern Orthodox Foundation in Pennsylvania, there were residents who, let’s just say, functioned on an entirely different level of reality.

The Metropolitan said we had pastoral responsibility towards them.

IF they attended Liturgy in our chapel (which was beautifully adorned) and IF they came up of their own will to Communion, they were to be Communed.

I think this is the principle that applies to your FIL.

I’m not sure exactly what you mean by “functioned on an entirely different level of reality,” but a person who has lost mental faculties to the point of not recognizing that they are receiving the Body of Christ CANNOT be given Holy Communion.

 

[LilyM]

I’m not sure exactly what you mean by “functioned on an entirely different level of reality,” but a person who has lost mental faculties to the point of not recognizing that they are receiving the Body of Christ CANNOT be given Holy Communion.

Someone who ‘functions on a different level of reality’ to the point where, as St Paul says, they cannot discern the Body and Blood of Christ, is not capable of worthy reception, and as St Paul also says, should not be permitted to receive.

 

[EeyoresButerfly]

Perhaps it’s just me, but the way I look at it, this is between your FIL and God. Is it technically correct? No. Certainly you should look for ways to remedy the situation, but if you do not find a satisfactory solution then I would not sweat it. I would rather your father in law receive communion against the rules than have his relationship with God suffer because he feels slighted by decisions being made about his faith.

I had a similar situation with a friend in Orlando whom I brought to church with me. I explained to her that as a non-Catholic she could not receive communion- she did so anyway. It upset me at the time, but I realized that although I explained to her the rules and the reason, she didn’t realize just how important this issue was to us or what the big deal was. Me harping on it or judging her for it was not going to change what happened and would only alienate her. I chose to let it go.

 

[EvelynEVF]

Regarding not having the mental faculties to receive, remember that the poster is Eastern, in which tradition infants receive Communion. They definitely don’t have the capacity to understand Whom they are receiving, yet they are welcome. So it sounds like there is a paradigm difference here. I don’t know the Latin reasons for waiting until children are older, but I do know that kids’ understanding is certainly limited. So I’m not sure that mature understanding should be a criterion for reception.

Besides, and I say this with the deepest love and respect for my Bridegroom, how totally crazy is it that we consume our God to invite Him to consume us? Does anybody really have the capacity to understand that? Sure, we articulate it, but we don’t really grasp it.

 

[PhilotheaZ]

So I’m not sure that mature understanding should be a criterion for reception.

Besides, and I say this with the deepest love and respect for my Bridegroom, how totally crazy is it that we consume our God to invite Him to consume us? Does anybody really have the capacity to understand that? Sure, we articulate it, but we don’t really grasp it.

We don’t have to have a complete understanding of the Eucharist. That’s impossible this side of heaven — the ultimate mystery. However, we do have to at least distinguish that it is something other than ordinary bread, that it is something holy.

 

[EvelynEVF]

But a baby has no idea about holy anything. And when we’re talking about disabled adults, we have no idea just what they perceive or believe, unless they can articulate it.

All I’m saying is that within the Eastern tradition, it makes sense to commune people who may or may not understand due to handicap or whatever. They are not profaning the Eucharist. I am not advocating offering Jesus to people who can tell us that they do not believe He is there.

 

[LilyM]

But a baby has no idea about holy anything. And when we’re talking about disabled adults, we have no idea just what they perceive or believe, unless they can articulate it.

All I’m saying is that within the Eastern tradition, it makes sense to commune people who may or may not understand due to handicap or whatever. They are not profaning the Eucharist. I am not advocating offering Jesus to people who can tell us that they do not believe He is there.

Infant communion is hallowed Apostolic tradition - has been done since early days of the Church by my understanding. Even then the Latin Rite doesn’t encourage it or make a regular practice of it.

Communion of adults suffering from dementia, or otherwise incapable of discernment, on the other hand, has no such traditional endorsement behind it.

It’s one of those grey areas like limbo - we simply don’t know that unbaptised babies will automatically get a free pass to heaven, and NOT end up elsewhere due to their stain of original sin, so we can’t presume that it’s OK to neglect to baptise children.

Similarly, we simply do not know that it’s OK to commune adults who cannot recognise the Body and Blood. And if we are going to err in our handling of the Blessed Sacrament, by all means let us err on the side of denying it too often rather than on the side of being too free with it.

As you say ‘they are not profaning the Eucharist’ - well, profanation requires intent - I’m sure very few people who receive, no matter how unworthy, have the INTENT of profaning it. So they don’t usually incur guilt - although they can be harmed nonetheless, even physically as St Paul says. A bit like sticking a faulty appliance into a power socket will damage the appliance even where there was no intent to do so. The appliance isn’t at fault, but the one who plugs it in while suspecting it is faulty certainly is!

The one who distributes the Eucharist, for their part, has an obligation at least to show proper respect for the Blessed Sacrament by denying it at least in cases where there is so much doubt as to its worthy reception as the case of adults who cannot discern.

 

[EvelynEVF]

Then what do you do in the case of lifelong faithful Catholics who gradually slide into Alzheimers or other dementia? At what point does one decide that they no longer know enough to receive the Eucharist?

I also wonder who has the authority to deny someone Communion. It is my understanding that an EMHC must minister the Body and Blood to whomever appears in front of them.

 

[redrosetea]

I think you need to let your priest make the call…It is one of the areas where a lay persons opinion is simply not good enough

 

[benedictgal]

Regarding not having the mental faculties to receive, remember that the poster is Eastern, in which tradition infants receive Communion. They definitely don’t have the capacity to understand Whom they are receiving, yet they are welcome. So it sounds like there is a paradigm difference here. I don’t know the Latin reasons for waiting until children are older, but I do know that kids’ understanding is certainly limited. So I’m not sure that mature understanding should be a criterion for reception.

Besides, and I say this with the deepest love and respect for my Bridegroom, how totally crazy is it that we consume our God to invite Him to consume us? Does anybody really have the capacity to understand that? Sure, we articulate it, but we don’t really grasp it.

Evelyn, first of all, we cannot mix and match between the Eastern and Latin Rites. Second, the man in the OP is not even Catholic. The reception of Holy Communion is reserved only for those who are Catholics in good standing with the Church. As Redemptionis Sacramentum notes:

84.] Furthermore when Holy Mass is celebrated for a large crowd – for example, in large cities – care should be taken lest out of ignorance non-Catholics or even non-Christians come forward for Holy Communion, without taking into account the Church’s Magisterium in matters pertaining to doctrine and discipline. It is the duty of Pastors at an opportune moment to inform those present of the authenticity and the discipline that are strictly to be observed.

Furthermore, the same document notes that:

85.] **Catholic ministers licitly administer the Sacraments only to the Catholic faithful, **who likewise receive them licitly only from Catholic ministers,

We need to respect the conditions that the Church establishes for the reception of Holy Communion.

 

[EvelynEVF]

It is not my intention to disrespect the Church’s conditions one bit. I’m thinking out loud, mostly about the difference between East and West, and who makes these kinds of decisions and how they make them pastorally when it isn’t always clear cut. I have deviated from the initial question, so I’ll stop now, at least with the out loud part.