Non-Catholics and Communion

[reteeks21]

I’mjust curious, but can someone give me a good reason why non-catholics cannot take Communion? It would seem to me that it would be okay since we (catholics and protestants) are practicing Christians. I think if some churches were not so strict with Communion, more protestants might see and experience the joy and intimacy that comes with taking Communion.

 

[ralphinal]

I’mjust curious, but can someone give me a good reason why non-catholics cannot take Communion? It would seem to me that it would be okay since we (catholics and protestants) are practicing Christians. I think if some churches were not so strict with Communion, more protestants might see and experience the joy and intimacy that comes with taking Communion.

This can be answered from the theological and the non-theological point of veiw.

Theologically, Catholics hold that Communion is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus in the form of bread and wine. According to St Paul, anyone who receives of the cup unworthily is sinning. If you allow people who do not believe to recieve, then you are allowing some to recieve unworthily. Also, to recieve communion, you show yourself to be a member of the Church. It is a sacrament of Initiation, has it has the effect of binding us together symbolically and spiritually. To receive when you are not a part is to show a unity that sadly does not exist, but should be worked towards.

Non-Theologically, to ask the Church to open the sacrament to those who do not agree with her is to ask her to violate God’s commands. We are to be a people set apart. It is a sacrament given to us by Jesus and man has no right to alter the rules.

I see your point about it inviting more into the faith, but it is a false connection.

 

[reteeks21]

If someone lived out in the woods, and they had a Bible but they had no exposure to the Catholic Church, would it be sinning if they observed Communion as a believer? I highly doubt it. If I am believer in Christ, why should I not be able to revieve it? If I did not think that Catholic Communion was not holy, I would not want to take it. To me, it is a great sign of ecuminism and unity in the body. I have a hard time when anyone from any denomination assumes that they have it completely right; when they state that others cannot partake because they assume they are not a part of the Church.

 

[rstegeman]

It’s more than just a belief in Christ. Catholics recognize the Eucharist as the true body and blood of Jesus. In contrast, the few protestant denominations that observe communion, only believe it as symbolic.

Outside of that, I don’t have a really good answer as to why not.

 

[Evan]

If someone lived out in the woods, and they had a Bible but they had no exposure to the Catholic Church, would it be sinning if they observed Communion as a believer?

Communion (union together) is a community action. If you live in the woods by your self, there is no community present.

If you live in the woods by yourself, there is no priest to confect the Eucharist. You might be receiving bread and wine, but no Consecrated Hosts are present.

To me, it is a great sign of ecuminism and unity in the body.

Since you are taking communion and are NOT part of the communion of the Church, this ‘sign’ of unity is a lie. You are not in communion with the Body of Christ, the Church. When given we are to affirm we are in the Body of Christ (respond AMEN!!)

I have a hard time when anyone from any denomination assumes that they have it completely right

The Catholic Church is the One True Church established by Jesus Christ. It cannot teach falsehood, therefore it has it right. No other church can claim this and I don’t know of other christian churches that make such a claim. Jesus Himself guarenteed that the church would not fall into error. (BTW the Church does not consider itself a denomination)

 

[deacon_d]

This can be answered from the theological and the non-theological point of veiw.

Theologically, Catholics hold that Communion is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus in the form of bread and wine. According to St Paul, anyone who receives of the cup unworthily is sinning. If you allow people who do not believe to recieve, then you are allowing some to recieve unworthily. Also, to recieve communion, you show yourself to be a member of the Church. It is a sacrament of Initiation, has it has the effect of binding us together symbolically and spiritually. To receive when you are not a part is to show a unity that sadly does not exist, but should be worked towards.

Your post looks like a direct quote from newadvent.org. I remember reading this one day. There’s a big flaw with the way Paul’s letter to the Corinthians is interpreted here. The first thing is to understand why he even wrote it. The reason is the bad behavior that the church in Corinth was exhibiting at the time. The leaders in that church were basically taking donations from the poor and then not letting them partake in their worship or in the Lord’s supper. They also were literally abusing the Lord’s supper using it as an excuse to get drunk. Imagine a Priest saying the blood of Christ and then proceeding to guzzle an entire gallon of wine. This was the unworthy manner Paul was referring to and in fact many of them had been getting sick which Paul attributes to GOD’s punishment for this behavior. There was alot of sexual immorality and all this led to Paul’s letter in which he basically rips them apart for this behavior and then re-educates them on what the Lord’s supper is really all about as well as what it means to be a Christian.

Paul stresses the point of examining oneself before partaking in the Lord’s supper because it is the most outward expression of our Faith in Jesus, not merely a sign that we belong to the church. Baptism if anything is the initiation (your term) into Jesus church. When we see the bread and wine we see Jesus body and blood. The Corinthians were allowing people to partake in the Lord’s supper without professing Jesus as their savior and many could question whether they actually believed or were just there to take advantage of the free wine and food. Some true believers were not allowed to paticipate and eventually attending church and partaking in the Lord’s supper became more of a social event than worship of GOD. Given these conditions Paul’s letter makes more sense.

Non-Theologically, to ask the Church to open the sacrament to those who do not agree with her is to ask her to violate God’s commands. We are to be a people set apart. It is a sacrament given to us by Jesus and man has no right to alter the rules.

Closing the ability for a fully believing Christian to partake in the Lord’s supper is a sin to me. When we attended service at St. Stephens in Baltimore Maryland a family had several guests there for a baptism. The priest literally said if you are not Roman Catholic just fold your arms and we will give you a blessing. I know many people who were Christians that still received because they felt they had a responsibility to Jesus to honor HIS request of do this in remembrance of ME. One person commented his responsibility was to Jesus which supercedes anyone. My wife is not Roman Catholic and neither is our daughter but both are believers. They have received communion many times in Roman Catholic churches. Needless to say they have never gotten sick. I actually witnessed a Priest giving communion to non Roman Catholics at my parents home. We had a private service for our family. My Fathers’ family were all Methodists. My grandmother asked the Priest if she could receive to which he responded “Do you believe in God”. She said of course I do. He said you are more than welcome to receive. So this definitely is not consistent within all Roman Catholic churches.

I see your point about it inviting more into the faith, but it is a false connection.

I would agree that we shouldn’t just hand out communion to someone who thinks they may want to believe. You should have to be baptised before receiving and understand what it is your doing when you do receive. Offering communion in hopes that they may develop Faith is definitely putting the cart before the proverbial horse.

PEACE

 

[ralphinal]

Your post looks like a direct quote from newadvent.org. I remember reading this one day. There’s a big flaw with the way Paul’s letter to the Corinthians is interpreted here. The first thing is to understand why he even wrote it. The reason is the bad behavior that the church in Corinth was exhibiting at the time. The leaders in that church were basically taking donations from the poor and then not letting them partake in their worship or in the Lord’s supper. They also were literally abusing the Lord’s supper using it as an excuse to get drunk. Imagine a Priest saying the blood of Christ and then proceeding to guzzle an entire gallon of wine. This was the unworthy manner Paul was referring to and in fact many of them had been getting sick which Paul attributes to GOD’s punishment for this behavior. There was alot of sexual immorality and all this led to Paul’s letter in which he basically rips them apart for this behavior and then re-educates them on what the Lord’s supper is really all about as well as what it means to be a Christian.

So you are saying that there is no sin other than not accepting Christ that would proclude one from receiving?

Paul stresses the point of examining oneself before partaking in the Lord’s supper because it is the most outward expression of our Faith in Jesus, not merely a sign that we belong to the church. Baptism if anything is the initiation (your term) into Jesus church. When we see the bread and wine we see Jesus body and blood. The Corinthians were allowing people to partake in the Lord’s supper without professing Jesus as their savior and many could question whether they actually believed or were just there to take advantage of the free wine and food. Some true believers were not allowed to paticipate and eventually attending church and partaking in the Lord’s supper became more of a social event than worship of GOD. Given these conditions Paul’s letter makes more sense.

Closing the ability for a fully believing Christian to partake in the Lord’s supper is a sin to me. When we attended service at St. Stephens in Baltimore Maryland a family had several guests there for a baptism. The priest literally said if you are not Roman Catholic just fold your arms and we will give you a blessing. I know many people who were Christians that still received because they felt they had a responsibility to Jesus to honor HIS request of do this in remembrance of ME. One person commented his responsibility was to Jesus which supercedes anyone. My wife is not Roman Catholic and neither is our daughter but both are believers. They have received communion many times in Roman Catholic churches. Needless to say they have never gotten sick. I actually witnessed a Priest giving communion to non Roman Catholics at my parents home. We had a private service for our family. My Fathers’ family were all Methodists. My grandmother asked the Priest if she could receive to which he responded “Do you believe in God”. She said of course I do. He said you are more than welcome to receive. So this definitely is not consistent within all Roman Catholic churches.

Some people go against proper teachings everyday. Some break civil laws daily too. I sped today on the interstate. It does not mean the speed limit is wrong.

I would agree that we shouldn’t just hand out communion to someone who thinks they may want to believe. You should have to be baptised before receiving and understand what it is your doing when you do receive. Offering communion in hopes that they may develop Faith is definitely putting the cart before the proverbial horse.

PEACE

I agree with that.

Would you accept that it is our Church and we can require you to be a member before you receive?

 

[holdencaulfield]

I’mjust curious, but can someone give me a good reason why non-catholics cannot take Communion? It would seem to me that it would be okay since we (catholics and protestants) are practicing Christians. I think if some churches were not so strict with Communion, more protestants might see and experience the joy and intimacy that comes with taking Communion.

At first, I had a lot of trouble with this. Let me do my best to explain it to you.

“Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 11:27)

In this passage St. Paul speaks about how one must be in a state of grace and be without mortal sin. Otherwise it is considered a sin.

“A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.” (1 Corinthians 11:28)

St. Paul shows that one must have been to Confession with this passage, otherwise it is a sin to partake in Communion. For Protestants this would be impossible. The Church does this to keep them from sin.

“For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.” (1 Corinthians 11:29)

This is the main reason. Because Protestants don’t believe in Transubstantiation, they are sinning against the Lord when the partake in a Catholic Communion. This is the main reason the Church does not allow non-Catholics to partake. Again they are keeping Protestants from sin.

Hope this helps.

 

[khutcheson]

Would you accept that it is our Church and we can require you to be a member before you receive?

No, it’s Christ’s church. If you are saying that you believe that He, through the Holy Spirit guiding your Church" has limited communion to members, I’d acknowledge your point.

 

[Rolltide]

What is so very interesting about this thread is that it uncovers one of the absolutely fundamental differences between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, and Protestant denominations. Protestants largely believe that going to church is primarily about hearing a sermon and being instructed in the faith, as well as bringing the community of Christ together. It is about praising God, but not precisely the physical worship of God. The Catholic Church believes that the point of going to church is the actual worship of God. Since we believe in Transubstantiation, we believe that Jesus is physically present in the room with us. We are literally bowing down before our Savior physically present and praising him. We are outside of time, watching the re-presentation of the Sacrifice of Christ on Calvary itself. As such, it also serves as a sacrament of initiation, along with baptism and confirmation. It is called communion because we are demonstrating that we are acting in communion with one another and believe all that the Catholic Church teaches. Likewise, at the Last Supper, the Apostles were signing onto their mission to follow Jesus precisely as he instructed them. Even then, one Apostle, Judas, received unworthily and went on to betray Christ. Of course, he eventually suffered the consequences. It is important to note that the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and other churches, such as the Assyrian Church of the East, also practice closed Communion and believe in Transubstantiation in the same way that Catholics do. As such, the VAST majority of Christians worldwide actually do NOT believe in open communion (about 77% of all Christians). If you do not believe in Transubstantiation and receive communion, for Catholics, this would be a form of blasphemy and heresy, as you are receiving something that you don’t even believe in. There are MANY other forms of ecumenism that are possible besides the sharing of communion.

To me, it is a great sign of ecuminism and unity in the body. I have a hard time when anyone from any denomination assumes that they have it completely right; when they state that others cannot partake because they assume they are not a part of the Church.

Interestingly, I’ve always been just as troubled about open communion as many Protestants are about closed communion. It would never have even entered my head, even if my church allowed it, to receive communion in another denomination if they did not share the belief in the Real Presence. (Communion between Orthodox and Catholics is possible in very rare circumstances, because they share the core belief in Transubstantiation). There’s another issue that’s not being addressed here, and that is the belief in absolutism vs. relativism. Protestants tend to believe in relativism as so far as personal interpretation of the Bible is allowed. As long as it doesn’t affect salvation, a wide range of belief is tolerated. Catholics and Orthodox believe that the Church speaks for Christ, and that there must be a basic consensus. Both points of view cannot be correct, and that’s the problem. For Catholics (and Orthodox), either their religion is wholly correct, or it is not. I wouldn’t be Catholic if I believed it to be only partially correct. To me, the whole point of following a denomination is that you think they have their beliefs totally right. If you don’t, why on earth are you following them?!

 

[JonNC]

I’mjust curious, but can someone give me a good reason why non-catholics cannot take Communion? It would seem to me that it would be okay since we (catholics and protestants) are practicing Christians. I think if some churches were not so strict with Communion, more protestants might see and experience the joy and intimacy that comes with taking Communion.

As a Lutheran, I think the best reason for non-catholics not to take Communion in a Catholic Church is because they’ve asked us not to. When I visit a Catholic church for Mass, I am a guest in their church. If nothing else, a guest should respect the wishes of the host. If we honor, love, and respect our brothers and sisters in Christ, we respect their wishes when they welcome us into their house of worship. Then, we pray the Holy Spirit lead all of us to unity, so this is no longer a question.

Blessings,
Jon

 

[holdencaulfield]

What is so very interesting about this thread is that it uncovers one of the absolutely fundamental differences between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, and Protestant denominations. Protestants largely believe that going to church is primarily about hearing a sermon and being instructed in the faith, as well as bringing the community of Christ together. It is about praising God, but not precisely the physical worship of God. The Catholic Church believes that the point of going to church is the actual worship of God. Since we believe in Transubstantiation, we believe that Jesus is physically present in the room with us. We are literally bowing down before our Savior physically present and praising him. We are outside of time, watching the re-presentation of the Sacrifice of Christ on Calvary itself. As such, it also serves as a sacrament of initiation, along with baptism and confirmation. It is called communion because we are demonstrating that we are acting in communion with one another and believe all that the Catholic Church teaches. Likewise, at the Last Supper, the Apostles were signing onto their mission to follow Jesus precisely as he instructed them. Even then, one Apostle, Judas, received unworthily and went on to betray Christ. Of course, he eventually suffered the consequences. It is important to note that the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and other churches, such as the Assyrian Church of the East, also practice closed Communion and believe in Transubstantiation in the same way that Catholics do. As such, the VAST majority of Christians worldwide actually do NOT believe in open communion (about 77% of all Christians). If you do not believe in Transubstantiation and receive communion, for Catholics, this would be a form of blasphemy and heresy, as you are receiving something that you don’t even believe in. There are MANY other forms of ecumenism that are possible besides the sharing of communion.

Interestingly, I’ve always been just as troubled about open communion as many Protestants are about closed communion. It would never have even entered my head, even if my church allowed it, to receive communion in another denomination if they did not share the belief in the Real Presence. (Communion between Orthodox and Catholics is possible in very rare circumstances, because they share the core belief in Transubstantiation). There’s another issue that’s not being addressed here, and that is the belief in absolutism vs. relativism. Protestants tend to believe in relativism as so far as personal interpretation of the Bible is allowed. As long as it doesn’t affect salvation, a wide range of belief is tolerated. Catholics and Orthodox believe that the Church speaks for Christ, and that there must be a basic consensus. Both points of view cannot be correct, and that’s the problem. For Catholics (and Orthodox), either their religion is wholly correct, or it is not. I wouldn’t be Catholic if I believed it to be only partially correct. To me, the whole point of following a denomination is that you think they have their beliefs totally right. If you don’t, why on earth are you following them?!

Nice point.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

If someone lived out in the woods, and they had a Bible…

Why is it that every time I hear someone use the example of “someone” living in the woods they always have a Bible… Are we to assume there is always going to be a Barnes and Noble in the woods?

God bless

 

[holdencaulfield]

Why is it that every time I hear someone use the example of “someone” living in the woods they always have a Bible… Are we to assume there is always going to be a Barnes and Noble in the woods?

God bless

Not if they start their own druidic religion and worship trees. Wouldn’t then the paper from the trees be evil?

 

[Rolltide]

Why is it that every time I hear someone use the example of “someone” living in the woods they always have a Bible… Are we to assume there is always going to be a Barnes and Noble in the woods?

God bless

This is a bit like those sola scriptura people who think that Moses carried a staff in one hand, and a leather-bound, red letter edition of the KJV of the Bible in the other…

 

[hasikelee]

I’mjust curious, but can someone give me a good reason why non-catholics cannot take Communion? It would seem to me that it would be okay since we (catholics and protestants) are practicing Christians. I think if some churches were not so strict with Communion, more protestants might see and experience the joy and intimacy that comes with taking Communion.

reteeks21, do you believe that sex before marriage is a good thing that should be allowed?

 

[Rolltide]

If someone lived out in the woods, and they had a Bible but they had no exposure to the Catholic Church, would it be sinning if they observed Communion as a believer? I highly doubt it.

The more I read this, the more problems I find with the statement. First, how did they get this Bible in the first place? How would they know it was important? Who gave it to them and told them it was necessary? They must have had SOME contact with Christians. If they believe a Bible ONLY is necessary, then it’s probably Protestants. Secondly, if they’d had no exposure to the Catholic Church, it backs up that they’re Protestant. Third, in order to sin, you need to be aware that it’s a sin, so while the general answer is that no, receiving communion would not be a sin since they didn’t understand the nature of the sin, HOW would they possibly be receiving Catholic communion if they’ve had no exposure to the Catholic Church?!?!?! This scenario is impossible! Either:

a) A priest walks into the woods with communion in a pyx, and offers it unworthily to a non-Catholic (not likely), or

b) The woodsman has somehow found a Catholic Church somewhere (and where is this in the woods?! is he coming into town? If so, shouldn’t he have heard of it?) and he goes up for communion (not likely).

 

[Rolltide]

Closing the ability for a fully believing Christian to partake in the Lord’s supper is a sin to me.

And there is the root of the problem. A Catholic (or Orthodox) believer would say that you are NOT a fully believing Christian. You believe in some elements of the faith, but reject others. Therein lies the rub.

 

[Reuben_J]

If someone lived out in the woods, and they had a Bible but they had no exposure to the Catholic Church, would it be sinning if they observed Communion as a believer? I highly doubt it. If I am believer in Christ, why should I not be able to revieve it? If I did not think that Catholic Communion was not holy, I would not want to take it. To me, it is a great sign of ecuminism and unity in the body. I have a hard time when anyone from any denomination assumes that they have it completely right; when they state that others cannot partake because they assume they are not a part of the Church.

The host that we recieved during the holy communion is the body and blood of Jesus after it was consecrated by an ordained priest, as minister of Jesus Christ. As non-Catholic, do you believe this?

If you believe this, which in any case you’d be Catholic, by all means, recieve the host. But if you do not believe that the host is body and blood of Jesus, why participate in something that you do not believe?

The reason why non-Catholics are not invited to go for holy communion is simply because of the belief factor. Since the Church regards the host as sacred, it naturally guards it from being given to the unbelievers. Unbelievers of the Holy Eucharist, that is.

Personally I think non-Catholics and Catholics alike do not have an issue with this.

 

[holdencaulfield]

This is a bit like those sola scriptura people who think that Moses carried a staff in one hand, and a leather-bound, red letter edition of the KJV of the Bible in the other…

True, but he did, just look in the Bible, it’s right here:

Lol jk jk