Non-catholic Christian husband takes Catholic communion- Seeing help, guidance and prayers, no unconstructive criticism please

  • Thread starter Thread starter Blesse
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m in pretty good company teaching this, since it’s what all the Church Fathers and Doctors teach.

From the Didache: And let none eat or drink of your Eucharist but such as have been baptized into the name of the Lord, for of a truth the Lord hath said concerning this, Give not that which is holy unto dogs. ( 9:1-5)

On the Lord’s Day of the Lord gather together, break bread and give thanks, after confessing your transgressions SO THAT YOUR SACRIFICE MAY BE PURE. Let no one who has a quarrel with his neighbor join you until he is reconciled by the Lord: “In every place and time let there be OFFERED TO ME A CLEAN SACRIFICE. For I am Great King,” says the Lord, “and My name is wonderful among the Gentiles.” (14:1-2)
 
Last edited:
Spyridon said:
I’ll accept concession.

Considering I’m teaching Catholic infallible doctrine, I can see why you can’t overcome it.
Click to expand...
Probably because “what should she do?” has NOT been infallibly addressed, as I understand it.
 
1 Corinthians 11:27-29
27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.
28 Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
29 For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
Click to expand...
Love is not an emotion or feeling. To love is to will the most perfect existence for another. The most perfect existence for another is to conform to what God wills for our life.

While it will potentially be hard, awkward, and/or upsetting to address this issue, you are bound by vows to love your husband. Speak with your priest and get his guidance on how to best handle the situation, but remember what Jesus said in the Gospel reading today:

Luke 12:49-53
49 “I came to cast fire upon the earth; and would that it were already kindled!
50 I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how I am constrained until it is accomplished!
51 Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division;
52 for henceforth in one house there will be five divided, three against two and two against three;
53 they will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against her mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.”
Click to expand...
The parallel verses in Matthew’s gospel would also be good to meditate upon as well:
34 "Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.
35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
36 and a man’s foes will be those of his own household.
37 He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me;
38 and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.
39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.
Click to expand...
Never let a fear of discord prevent you from obeying the Lord.
 
Last edited:
So in accord with Didache the husband is baptised.
Other baptised Christians are not without grace and therefore worthy.
Whence sacrilege?
 
Last edited:
From Luke 9;

49 “Master,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we tried to stop him, because he is not one of us.”
50 “Do not stop him,” Jesus said, “for whoever is not against you is for you.”

From Solomon, in Proverbs 20;
22 Do not say, “I will repay evil”; Wait for the LORD, and He will save you.

From Matthew 19;
14 But Jesus said, “Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
 
Can. 843 §1 Sacred ministers may not deny the sacraments to those who opportunely ask for them, are properly disposed and are not prohibited by law from receiving them.

Can. 844 §1 Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments only to catholic members of Christ’s faithful, who equally may lawfully receive them only from catholic ministers, except as provided in §§2, 3 and 4 of this canon and in can. 861 §2.

§2 Whenever necessity requires or a genuine spiritual advantage commends it, and provided the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, Christ’s faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a catholic minister, may lawfully receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick from non-catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.

§3 Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick to members of the eastern Churches not in full communion with the catholic Church, if they spontaneously ask for them and are properly disposed. The same applies to members of other Churches which the Apostolic See judges to be in the same position as the aforesaid eastern Churches so far as the sacraments are concerned.

§4 If there is a danger of death or if, in the judgement of the diocesan Bishop or of the Episcopal Conference, there is some other grave and pressing need, catholic ministers may lawfully administer these same sacraments to other christians not in full communion with the catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who spontaneously ask for them, provided that they demonstrate the catholic faith in respect of these sacraments and are properly disposed.

§5 In respect of the cases dealt with in §§2, 3 and 4, the diocesan Bishop or the Episcopal Conference is not to issue general norms except after consultation with the competent authority, at least at the local level, of the non-catholic Church or community concerned.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You are doing some incredible mental gymnastics here to try and thrwart Church teaching in favor of wanton reception of the Eucharist, which constitutes sacrilege. I applaud your herculean effort.

I will let Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI speak now:

The Eucharist is not itself the sacrament of reconciliation, but in fact it presupposes that sacrament. It is the sacrament of the reconciled, to which the Lord invites all those who have become one with him; who certainly still remain weak sinners, but yet have given their hand to him and have become part of his family.

That is why, from the beginning, the Eucharist has been preceded by a discernment … (I Corinthians 11:27 ff). The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles [the Didache] is one of the oldest writings outside the New Testament, from the beginning of the Second Century, it takes up this apostolic tradition and has the priest, just before distributing the sacrament saying:”Whoever is holy, let him approach, whoever is not, let him do penance” (Didache 10).
 
Random cherry picked Bible verses taken out of context do not trump infallible Church doctrine.

Try again.
 
The Holy Father just answered it for me.

I defer to the Pope here.
 
Spyridon said:
Random cherry picked Bible verses taken out of context do not trump infallible Church doctrine.

Try again.
Click to expand...
I’m not trying to trump infallible doctrine. I’m supporting my claim that it isn’t up to her to enforce it upon the non-catholic head of her household.
 
Vonsalza said:
From Solomon, in Proverbs 20;

22 Do not say, “I will repay evil”; Wait for the LORD, and He will save you.
Click to expand...
I can understand what led you to reply with the other verses you quoted, I do not understand why you mentioned this one?
 
AveOTheotokos said:
40.png
Vonsalza:
From Solomon, in Proverbs 20;

22 Do not say, “I will repay evil”; Wait for the LORD, and He will save you.
Click to expand...
I can understand what led you to reply with the other verses you quoted, I do not understand why you mentioned this one?
Click to expand...
Sure.

It’s not her task to “repay” the “evil” of her husband taking the Eucharist. It’s the Lords.
 
And it’s not her job to sit silently while the Eucharist is desecrated.

Proverbs 29:24
Partners of a thief hate themselves;[k]
they hear the imprecation but do not testify.
 
I don’t recall mentioning anything about repaying evil of her husband. I specifically recommended that she love her husband, and that she should defer to her priest since her husband will not listen to her:

Matthew 18:15-17
15 "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.
16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.
17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Spyridon said:
And it’s not her job to sit silently while the Eucharist is desecrated.

Proverbs 29:24
Partners of a thief hate themselves;[k]
they hear the imprecation but do not testify.
Click to expand...
You have no idea if it’s being desecrated.

Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law - "Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion."

"The first case refers to those upon whom a canonical penalty of excommunication or interdiction has been publicly imposed for a grave canonical crime."

This obviously doesn’t apply here.

"The second situation, those obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin, is harder to determine and usually requires a case-by-case study. Even expert canonists disagree regarding the practical applications."

"It is difficult to determine if a grave sin is manifest. In order to be so, a sin must be known by a large part of the community, and this can also depend on the nature of the community itself."

The second is virtually unknowable.
 
Last edited:
Spyridon said:
The Holy Father just answered it for me.

I defer to the Pope here.
Click to expand...
If this is all as clear and infallible as you opine, and my observations are unclear and mental gymnastics, how is it you are all over the place here.

The question is simple.
Your extensive Papal quote doesn’t address it.

Why do you assert a graced, baptised Christian who approaches Jesus believing in the Real Presence is committing sacrilege and desecration?
Where is the infallible statement you speak of that says this is sacrilege or desecration?

Do you know what those terms mean?

Sure, it may be a bit naughty as the regularity may be illicit.
But sacrilege and desecration, this is extreme over emotional language surely?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top