Is Intercommunion with non-Catholics sinful?

[CatholicWord]

“In light of Catholics at Wedding of Prince of England”

I have been studying the issue of “communicatio in sacris” and the theology of the Church on this issue for sometime now.

Oddly, it appears this subject was lost after the 2nd Vatican Council.

In 1965 Dec. 7th, I believe Paul VI and Athenagoras I “lifted” the ecommunications of 1054 A.D.

However, previous Catholic (Latin) teaching condemned intercommunion (in prayer and eucharistic-communion) with non-Catholics as sinful and even heretical.

The best book I came across was one that was referenced and cited by Cardinal Alfons Marie Stickler before he died called “Communicatio in Sacris.”

lulu.com/product/paperback/communicatio-in-sacris/4818965?productTrackingContext=search_results/search_shelf/center/1

In this book it exposes the errors of Traditionalists and the rigid Orthodox Old Calendar Churches.

Without a doubt the most scholarly book I came across in a long time.

What our your thoughts on Communion with non-Catholics?

Let me know.

God Bless!

 

[Maureen_Brilla]

Catholics faithful to the Magisterial teachings do not participate in non-Catholic worship services. Non-Catholics are not supposed to receive the Eucharist if they happen to attend a Catholic mass. This is definite and not a matter of personal choice.

 

[kepha1]

“Intercommunion with non-Catholics” means you embrace the errors of that non-Catholic community. Witless Catholics who receive “communion” with non-Catholics do so out of social pressure and ignorance IMO.

 

[Church_Militant]

Sounds like someone could use a link to Ecclesia de Eucharistia (Note especially sections 43-46)

There is no intercommunion…

Also CA staff apologist Michelle Arnold deals with this topic in her AAA response below.
Why did Catholic bishops attend an Anglican royal wedding?

I don’t know what you read that said that Catholics should never attend non-Catholic weddings. In answers I have given, I have basically said that it depends on the situation and provided these guidelines to help laity discern the course of action in their particular situation.

I believe that, while those guidelines might be helpful for Catholic laity, Catholic clergy and religious must apply stricter standards. They have to be concerned that their presence at any particular non-Catholic wedding could be construed as “official” Church approval for a particular marriage. That is why I believe that Catholic clergy and religious should never attend presumptively-invalid marriages, whether or not a Catholic is one of the partners to the marriage.

In the case of the royal wedding between Prince William of Wales and Catherine Middleton, we have no reason to believe that their marriage is presumptively-invalid. So far as we know, neither have been married before. If both are baptized Christians, then their marriage is not just valid but a Christian sacrament. Given those facts, and given the recent elevation of the public profile of the Catholic Church in England with the establishment of the personal ordinariate for former Anglicans seeking refuge in the Catholic Church, it seems likely that England’s Catholic bishops see great value in promoting friendship between Catholics and Anglicans with the royal family in general and with the second in line to the throne in particular.

Also, take a look at Is it a sin to worship in other Christian churches?

 

[CatholicWord]

In the book “communicatio in sacris” lulu.com/product/paperback/communicatio-in-sacris/4818965?productTrackingContext=search_results/search_shelf/center/1

It has over 100 quotes from Saints and Roman Pontiffs that explicitly condemned inter communion with non-Catholics.

Oddly, the strict Old Calendarist Orthodox churches also condemn communicatio in sacris with non-Orthodox.

There is a quote by Pope Pius V I never seen before that was very clear in condemning this participation.

Any thoughts?

 

[Bookcat]

A Catholic may not receive Communion at a Protestant or like service. Such would be sinful…

(see too the post above from Church Militant …and the document he gives…)

 

[josephback]

It’s certainly misleading. Catholics should not take communion in a Protestant organization:tsktsk: This would go to endorse their understanding of things and be a disservice to all(especially them). We should be ready to answer with grace if they have questions about the Catholic Church and it’s teachings

 

[CatholicWord]

Has anyone read William DeTucci’s book: Communicatio in Sacris?

lulu.com/product/paperback/communicatio-in-sacris/4818965?productTrackingContext=search_results/search_shelf/center/1

Pope Innocent III stated:

“The canons have established that we should not hold communion after their death with those with whom we did not communicate during their lifetime, and that all those should be deprived of ecclesiastical burial who were separated from the unity of the Church, and at the moment of death were not reconciled thereunto.”

(In chapter xii, de sepulturis, lib. III, tit. Xxviii).

St. Bonaventure wrote:

“Once these conditions [intention of Orders] are present, the sacraments may be conferred by either the good or the wicked, the faithful or the heretical, within the Church or outside it: but within the Church, they are conferred both in fact and in effect, while outside it, although conferred in fact, they are not effective.”

(The Beviloquium, Part VI, Chapter 5, Article 1; See also: The Works of Bonaventure, translated by José de Vinck Docteur en Droit of Louvian University, Published by St. Anthony Guild Press, New Jersey, 1962, pp. 237-238).

 

[Ignatius]

Catholic (Latin) teaching condemned intercommunion (in prayer and eucharistic-communion) with non-Catholics as sinful and even heretical.

What our your thoughts on Communion with non-Catholics?

Personal opinion has no place in the matter, what matters is the Authentic Teaching of The Church, which states that the communion rail in The Catholic Church is open the our brothers in The Holy Orthodox churches and some others which have preserved valid sacramental faculties.

 

[mcrow]

Since taking “communion” in a protestant church is a mortal sin, I would say yes to the OP.

Think about it. The Eucharist is the pinnacle of our faith because we believe in transubstantiation where bread and wine are changed to the true body and blood of Christ. Protestants simply believe that “communion” is a symbolic gesture with no real sacramental value.

IMO, this is heresy and by far the biggest split between us and the protestants.

So, buy taking part in their “communion” you are knowingly taking part in an invalid Eucharist you are rejecting the true sacrament and basis of our faith.

Of course, like anything else, if you truly didn’t know it was a sin then of course it cannot be a mortal sin. Or that’s how I understand it.

 

[chaser]

As a Protestant, I find this page fascinating. I knew this was a point of contention, but not to this degree. Well… open doors and all that.

 

[mcrow]

As a Protestant, I find this page fascinating. I knew this was a point of contention, but not to this degree. Well… open doors and all that.

Doors are open and we welcome our protestant brothers and sisters to mass, we just take the Eucharist very seriously where as you do not.

Of course, I know plenty of Catholics that didn’t know about transubstantiation at all but then there’s a difference between not knowing and rejecting.

 

[chaser]

Doors are open and we welcome our protestant brothers and sisters to mass, we just take the Eucharist very seriously where as you do not.

Of course, I know plenty of Catholics that didn’t know about transubstantiation at all but then there’s a difference between not knowing and rejecting.

Oh we (at least my church) take communion very seriously. Communion taken with a heart at odds with God is considered near deadly, we fear God will bring punishment upon those who take communion disrespectfully.

 

[mcrow]

Oh we (at least my church) take communion very seriously. Communion taken with a heart at odds with God is considered near deadly, we fear God will bring punishment upon those who take communion disrespectfully.

What I mean is you do not believe that it is true body and blood. Or do you?

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread,and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

 

[chaser]

What I mean is you do not believe that it is true body and blood. Or do you?

Why would I take it if it had no significance? While many Protestants view the Lords Supper as purely representative, I see it as both, much like baptism. Communion is representative of much more than food, blood, and flesh. And more than that, its an ordained practice given to us by Jesus, how could it not be a spiritual event occurring? I don’t think transubstantiation is fully understood by anyone, but it definitey occurs

 

[mcrow]

Why would I take it if it had no significance? While many Protestants view the Lords Supper as purely representative, I see it as both, much like baptism. Communion is representative of much more than food, blood, and flesh. And more than that, its an ordained practice given to us by Jesus, how could it not be a spiritual event occurring? I don’t think transubstantiation is fully understood by anyone, but it definitey occurs

This is unusual, I’ve never heard of a Protestant church that believes that transubstantiation happens. In my experience, you’re church is pretty rare.

 

[RyanBlack]

Protestants simply believe that “communion” is a symbolic gesture with no real sacramental value.

This is an oversimplification. This is true of a number of Protestants. It is not true of a number of Protestants. Generally speaking, Lutherans and Anglicans view Eucharist as a sacrament, with Lutherans generally believing in Christ’s real presence in the sacrament and Anglicans accommodating a variety of views, ranging from affirmation of actual transubstantiation to a memorial meal. Also, you can find Methodists who believe in the real presence. On the other hand, in my experience, Baptists and Pentecostal Christians take a memorial meal view. Presbyterians are sort of in between (Calvin held to a “spiritual” presence of Christ in the sacrament.) I am not knowledgeable enough about other Protestant groups to comment on their beliefs.

 

[chaser]

This is unusual, I’ve never heard of a Protestant church that believes that transubstantiation happens. In my experience, you’re church is pretty rare.

It may be rare on a church level, but probably Not on a personal level. I know you may see me as a “mere Christian” instead of a good Catholic (saw that in another thread) but I am merely trying to draw close to God in the most Scripturally sound way I can find. I respect the Catholic church for their rich legacy, history, and desire for God. But for me, I find the GENERAL lack of emphasis of a pursuit of a personal relationship with God the deal breaker.

 

[mcrow]

This is an oversimplification. This is true of a number of Protestants. It is not true of a number of Protestants. Generally speaking, Lutherans and Anglicans view Eucharist as a sacrament, with Lutherans generally believing in Christ’s real presence in the sacrament and Anglicans accommodating a variety of views, ranging from affirmation of actual transubstantiation to a memorial meal. Also, you can find Methodists who believe in the real presence. On the other hand, in my experience, Baptists and Pentecostal Christians take a memorial meal view. Presbyterians are sort of in between (Calvin held to a “spiritual” presence of Christ in the sacrament.) I am not knowledgeable enough about other Protestant groups to comment on their beliefs.

That’s new to me. I was Presbyterian growing up and it was not taught that way. It was a symbolic jesture at that church. Later in life when looking into religion, I talked to a Lutheran Pastor several times and they did not teach the true presence there either. Could have been that individual Pastor.

Well, I’m relieved to find out that I may have been wrong in some cases as I think this should be a very important point to any Christian.

 

[mcrow]

It may be rare on a church level, but probably Not on a personal level. I know you may see me as a “mere Christian” instead of a good Catholic (saw that in another thread) but I am merely trying to draw close to God in the most Scripturally sound way I can find. I respect the Catholic church for their rich legacy, history, and desire for God. But for me, I find the GENERAL lack of emphasis of a pursuit of a personal relationship with God the deal breaker.

“mere Christian”? Not sure what you are refering to there. You are not Catholic according to your “religion” section on the forums, so no I wouldn’t consider you Catholic. I would not use the word “mere” either as you are christian or not, I don’t think there are any degrees.

I do disagree with your thought that there is a lack of emphasis of a pursiot of a presonal relationship with God. Prayer is a huge part of a Catholic’s life and it is very much an important teaching of the church. I really think you are as mistaken about this point as perhaps I am of the true presence thing.