Non-Orthodox receiving Communion in ROCOR?

[mkc1911]

I looked for some Orthodox forum to post this in, but I couldn’t find any, and I’m a member here (though a very inactive one) so I decided the best place to ask my question was here.

I’m Episcopalian (though a staunchly Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian whose Catholic best friend calls him “more Catholic than most Catholics”), but last evening and this morning, I visited a Russian Orthodox church (ROCOR). I attended the vigil Saturday night, where I met so many nice and warm people. However, this morning, when I attended the Divine Liturgy, something I feel shouldn’t have happened happened. When it came time for Communion, I respectfully went to the back to sit on a bench and be out of the way for the faithful Orthodox Christians, so they could receive the Sacrament. But in the middle of the administration of the Sacrament, a man, who recognized me from the night before and knew I wasn’t Orthodox, approached me and handed me some bread, saying “You can partake, you just can’t go up to the front”. Feeling very awkward about taking it but seeing no polite way to refuse him and not create a scene, I took it and ate it. I feel very guilty now, not only because I probably broke the rules, but also because I hadn’t confessed (yes, an Episcopalian who believes in the necessity of confession!).

So my question is this: was this man wrong in giving me the Sacrament? Or was it maybe non-consecrated bread or something? I’m all worried about it, and I plan on talking to my own priest about it at my next confession.

Thank you all for your help.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I looked for some Orthodox forum to post this in, but I couldn’t find any, and I’m a member here (though a very inactive one) so I decided the best place to ask my question was here.

I’m Episcopalian (though a staunchly Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian whose Catholic best friend calls him “more Catholic than most Catholics”), but last evening and this morning, I visited a Russian Orthodox church (ROCOR). I attended the vigil Saturday night, where I met so many nice and warm people. However, this morning, when I attended the Divine Liturgy, something I feel shouldn’t have happened happened. When it came time for Communion, I respectfully went to the back to sit on a bench and be out of the way for the faithful Orthodox Christians, so they could receive the Sacrament. But in the middle of the administration of the Sacrament, a man, who recognized me from the night before and knew I wasn’t Orthodox, approached me and handed me some bread, saying “You can partake, you just can’t go up to the front”. Feeling very awkward about taking it but seeing no polite way to refuse him and not create a scene, I took it and ate it. I feel very guilty now, not only because I probably broke the rules, but also because I hadn’t confessed (yes, an Episcopalian who believes in the necessity of confession!).

So my question is this: was this man wrong in giving me the Sacrament? Or was it maybe non-consecrated bread or something? I’m all worried about it, and I plan on talking to my own priest about it at my next confession.

Thank you all for your help.

Sounds like it was the antidoron. The unconsecrated part of the bread. You are allowed to have that. The consecrated bread is contained in the chalice with the wine.

 

[mkc1911]

Okay, good, I was worried I had done something wrong. I’m so ignorant of Orthodoxy that I didn’t know there was unconsecrated bread.

 

[prodromos]

Okay, good, I was worried I had done something wrong. I’m so ignorant of Orthodoxy that I didn’t know there was unconsecrated bread.

It is called “antidoro”, which translates as “instead of the gift”. It is bread from the offerings which aren’t consecrated for the eucharist, but it is still blessed by the priest.

 

[jcrichton]

I looked for some Orthodox forum to post this in, but I couldn’t find any, and I’m a member here (though a very inactive one) so I decided the best place to ask my question was here.

I’m Episcopalian (though a staunchly Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian whose Catholic best friend calls him “more Catholic than most Catholics”), but last evening and this morning, I visited a Russian Orthodox church (ROCOR). I attended the vigil Saturday night, where I met so many nice and warm people. However, this morning, when I attended the Divine Liturgy, something I feel shouldn’t have happened happened. When it came time for Communion, I respectfully went to the back to sit on a bench and be out of the way for the faithful Orthodox Christians, so they could receive the Sacrament. But in the middle of the administration of the Sacrament, a man, who recognized me from the night before and knew I wasn’t Orthodox, approached me and handed me some bread, saying “You can partake, you just can’t go up to the front”. Feeling very awkward about taking it but seeing no polite way to refuse him and not create a scene, I took it and ate it. I feel very guilty now, not only because I probably broke the rules, but also because I hadn’t confessed (yes, an Episcopalian who believes in the necessity of confession!).

So my question is this: was this man wrong in giving me the Sacrament? Or was it maybe non-consecrated bread or something? I’m all worried about it, and I plan on talking to my own priest about it at my next confession.

Thank you all for your help.

Hi!
…I think it depends upon your understanding of the Sacrament (I am ignorant of most non-Catholic understandings). If it is only symbolic (the Bread and Wine not being held as the true and actual Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ), then yes, you and that gentleman have erred–you’ve taken a very solemn Sacrament and downgraded it to a “feel good” moment (wanted to be/seem inclusive):

The Orthodox Church denies the doctrine that the Body and the Blood of the eucharist are merely intellectual or psychological symbols of Christ’s Body and Blood. (oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/worship/the-sacraments/holy-eucharist)

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Okay, good, I was worried I had done something wrong. I’m so ignorant of Orthodoxy that I didn’t know there was unconsecrated bread.

…I too were ignorant of this practice–please disregard my previous post since you nor the other gentleman have erred.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Tomdstone]

It is not Holy Communion if he knew you were not Orthodox. It is blessed bread which is sometimes given to non-Orthodox Christians.

 

[andrewstx]

I looked for some Orthodox forum to post this in, but I couldn’t find any, and I’m a member here (though a very inactive one) so I decided the best place to ask my question was here.

I’m Episcopalian (though a staunchly Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian whose Catholic best friend calls him “more Catholic than most Catholics”), but last evening and this morning, I visited a Russian Orthodox church (ROCOR). I attended the vigil Saturday night, where I met so many nice and warm people. However, this morning, when I attended the Divine Liturgy, something I feel shouldn’t have happened happened. When it came time for Communion, I respectfully went to the back to sit on a bench and be out of the way for the faithful Orthodox Christians, so they could receive the Sacrament. But in the middle of the administration of the Sacrament, a man, who recognized me from the night before and knew I wasn’t Orthodox, approached me and handed me some bread, saying “You can partake, you just can’t go up to the front”. Feeling very awkward about taking it but seeing no polite way to refuse him and not create a scene, I took it and ate it. I feel very guilty now, not only because I probably broke the rules, but also because I hadn’t confessed (yes, an Episcopalian who believes in the necessity of confession!).

So my question is this: was this man wrong in giving me the Sacrament? Or was it maybe non-consecrated bread or something? I’m all worried about it, and I plan on talking to my own priest about it at my next confession.

Thank you all for your help.

The man did not give you the sacrament he gave you antedoron ,it is not consecrated but part of the bread that is blessed. Some people call it "fellowship bread’.

 

[Peter_J]

I’m going to go against the crowd and say that the man gave you antidoron.



But anyhow, I don’t know what to make of his saying “You can partake, you just can’t go up to the front”. Sounds like either he doesn’t understand, or at least he’s creating confusion for others.

 

[Kmon23]

I assume he just used the word “partake” in a non conventional sense (where it usually refers to communion). By definition, he’s technically not wrong using “partake” for other things.

He probably meant “You can partake (of the antidoron), you just can’t go up to the front.” Technically this is correct, since antidoron that is present during communion is meant for those receiving the eucharist to help them swallow down the holy mysteries, and those not receiving would not go up to get antidoron if they weren’t receiving communion. Instead they (and everyone in general, including non-orthodox) would get antidoron post-liturgy. This is probably what he meant.

 

[Peter_J]

I assume he just used the word “partake” in a non conventional sense (where it usually refers to communion). By definition, he’s technically not wrong using “partake” for other things.

He probably meant “You can partake (of the antidoron), you just can’t go up to the front.” Technically this is correct,
…

Indeed. That’s why I made room for the possibility that he himself might understand and is just creating confusion for others.

 

[jcrichton]

I’m going to go against the crowd and say that the man gave you antidoron.



But anyhow, I don’t know what to make of his saying “You can partake, you just can’t go up to the front”. Sounds like either he doesn’t understand, or at least he’s creating confusion for others.

Hi, Peter!
…I think that the man was attempting to make the experience as pleasant as possible (an error that has been slithering into the Faith, aka “political correctness”); not wanting to have visitors/guests feel left out (or not to offend sensibilities) while simultaneously keeping the non-members from desecrating the Body and Blood.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Kosta]

I’m going to go against the crowd and say that the man gave you antidoron.



But anyhow, I don’t know what to make of his saying “You can partake, you just can’t go up to the front”. Sounds like either he doesn’t understand, or at least he’s creating confusion for others.

Hi, Peter!
…I think that the man was attempting to make the experience as pleasant as possible (an error that has been slithering into the Faith, aka “political correctness”); not wanting to have visitors/guests feel left out (or not to offend sensibilities) while simultaneously keeping the non-members from desecrating the Body and Blood.

Maran atha!

Angel

You’re both reading way too much into this. His English might have been not that good or he just didn’t know how to properly convey that communion is for Orthodox Christians only but antidoron is not. Not everyone’s a regular Thomas Aquinas where they can convey the most accurate of theological language so succinctly. He could have also just simplified what he was saying because he assumed the new, Protestant visitor would not have known the difference between the eucharist and antidoron. No need to make this into some sort of weird battle between political correctness and a denomination neither of you is a member of.

If he had said “I know that you are a member of a Protestant denomination and you are invited to partake of the Holy Mystery of Communion!” then you both might be right that it’s PC gone mad and he’s try to sew confusion into the ranks of the crowd.

 

[Reuben_J]

… saying “You can partake, you just can’t go up to the front”. Feeling very awkward about taking it but seeing no polite way to refuse him and not create a scene, I took it and ate it. I feel very guilty now, not only because I probably broke the rules, but also because I hadn’t confessed (yes, an Episcopalian who believes in the necessity of confession!).

So my question is this: was this man wrong in giving me the Sacrament? Or was it maybe non-consecrated bread or something? I’m all worried about it, and I plan on talking to my own priest about it at my next confession.

Thank you all for your help.

Look like the man wanted to be politically correct, not wanting to make you sort of out of place. He was not not very honest if that was what he wanted to do because obviously he made it as if you could receive, only could not go up front to receive.

It is strange that he should do that but I think maybe that is an accepted approach in their church when confronted with a situation like that.

In the Catholic Church we are more blunt and straight forward. We would just announce something like, “Communion is for practicing Catholics only.” Sometimes we add, “Non-Catholics may be seated,” during Communion.

 

[RyanBlack]

Look like the man wanted to be politically correct, not wanting to make you sort of out of place. He was not not very honest if that was what he wanted to do because obviously he made it as if you could receive, only could not go up front to receive.

It is strange that he should do that but I think maybe that is an accepted approach in their church when confronted with a situation like that.

In the Catholic Church we are more blunt and straight forward. We would just announce something like, “Communion is for practicing Catholics only.” Sometimes we add, “Non-Catholics may be seated,” during Communion.

I think you are assuming too much. When I was a catechumen in the Orthodox Church, I was regularly brought antidoron by some of those who had just received Holy Communion. What happened to the OP may be common practice at the parish he visited, and likely had nothing whatsoever to do with being “politically correct.”

 

[Peter_J]

You’re both reading way too much into this. His English might have been not that good or he just didn’t know how to properly convey that communion is for Orthodox Christians only but antidoron is not. Not everyone’s a regular Thomas Aquinas where they can convey the most accurate of theological language so succinctly. He could have also just simplified what he was saying because he assumed the new, Protestant visitor would not have known the difference between the eucharist and antidoron. No need to make this into some sort of weird battle between political correctness and a denomination neither of you is a member of.

If he had said “I know that you are a member of a Protestant denomination and you are invited to partake of the Holy Mystery of Communion!” then you both might be right that it’s PC gone mad and he’s try to sew confusion into the ranks of the crowd.

Wow.

Please reread what I said. I’m saying that, *if *the man understands properly (which I don’t claim to know one way or the other) then he was nevertheless speaking in a way that’s confusing to newcomers when he said “You can partake, you just can’t go up to the front”. My statement has nothing to do with anything about “trying to sow confusion”, political correctness (gone mad or regular), or jcrichton’s post(s).

 

[Reuben_J]

I think you are assuming too much. When I was a catechumen in the Orthodox Church, I was regularly brought antidoron by some of those who had just received Holy Communion. What happened to the OP may be common practice at the parish he visited, and likely had nothing whatsoever to do with being “politically correct.”

Perhaps.

I shouldn’t have used the phrase ‘politically correct’ because it assumes bigger deal to what it really is.

Still, the fact is the visitor (OP) was confused by whatever the man was trying to say.

This thing, I would say, commonly happens in the church. Question is how to deal with this situation in a way you want it? Of course now it is mere academic.

If we do not want a visitor to feel out of place, how is the best approach to it?

Either way, the man in question created confusion. I can only speculate but probably he thought that it was enough for him to tell the OP in such manner hoping that would settle the matter.

Apparently it didn’t work.

If I were him, but then again it is me, I would just tell the OP that he cannot go up to receive Communion but he can eat (partake) the antidioron, which is not consecrated but only blessed.

 

[jcrichton]

You’re both reading way too much into this. His English might have been not that good or he just didn’t know how to properly convey that communion is for Orthodox Christians only but antidoron is not. Not everyone’s a regular Thomas Aquinas where they can convey the most accurate of theological language so succinctly. He could have also just simplified what he was saying because he assumed the new, Protestant visitor would not have known the difference between the eucharist and antidoron. No need to make this into some sort of weird battle between political correctness and a denomination neither of you is a member of.

If he had said “I know that you are a member of a Protestant denomination and you are invited to partake of the Holy Mystery of Communion!” then you both might be right that it’s PC gone mad and he’s try to sew confusion into the ranks of the crowd.

…I am not making it a battle issue; I am simply stating that Christians have been watering down things under the understanding of sensibilities–would you imagine Christ calling back those who left Him and saying something to the effect: ‘Please, friends, do not fret, here take some of this bread (not the consecrated one)…’ or ‘You know, when I said that I didn’t mean anything by it, you can go on and make the Temple’s outer yards a free market…’ or ‘Come ‘n now, that stuff about the narrow path… hey that was just a supposin’, everyone knows that God is Love and He welcomes all as they want to be…’

I am not suggesting that anyone group of Christian has failed Christ by becoming “politically correct;” I’m saying that all Christians are engaging this “sensibilities” business… and not for the better. Believers are set to be sentinels not “friends” of the world (that was A&P’s slogan).

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Look like the man wanted to be politically correct, not wanting to make you sort of out of place. He was not not very honest if that was what he wanted to do because obviously he made it as if you could receive, only could not go up front to receive.

It is strange that he should do that but I think maybe that is an accepted approach in their church when confronted with a situation like that.

In the Catholic Church we are more blunt and straight forward. We would just announce something like, “Communion is for practicing Catholics only.” Sometimes we add, “Non-Catholics may be seated,” during Communion.

…in some parishes they are welcomed to receive a Blessing instead of the Eucharist.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Peter_J]

Perhaps.

I shouldn’t have used the phrase ‘politically correct’ because it assumes bigger deal to what it really is.

Still, the fact is the visitor (OP) was confused by whatever the man was trying to say.

This thing, I would say, commonly happens in the church. Question is how to deal with this situation in a way you want it? Of course now it is mere academic.

If we do not want a visitor to feel out of place, how is the best approach to it?

Either way, the man in question created confusion. I can only speculate but probably he thought that it was enough for him to tell the OP in such manner hoping that would settle the matter.

Apparently it didn’t work.

If I were him, but then again it is me, I would just tell the OP that he cannot go up to receive Communion but he can eat (partake) the antidioron, which is not consecrated but only blessed.

This is a situation where it’s possible to get carried away, either in defense of the man’s actions or in criticism of him (in particular, in assuming motives that we don’t know he had).