Q: Can a Eucharistic minister withhold Communion from someone?

[YoungTradCath]

This is just another reason why regular scheduling of EMHCs is imprudent. If I was asked to be one, I would have to refuse. There is just too much that could go wrong, too many situations that could arise.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

This is just another reason why regular scheduling of EMHCs is imprudent. If I was asked to be one, I would have to refuse. There is just too much that could go wrong, too many situations that could arise.

As one who used to help recruit, train and schedule EM’sHC, I find this attitude sad.
When I approached someone to seek their help in this ministry, it was usually because I felt that the were mature in their faith, had a good understanding of Eucharistic theology, and knew that they were helping in a special way that was more about God & neighbor than it was about self.
Sometimes, the best thing is to lead by example.

I will admit that I have seen my share of EM’sHC that have not been trained properly, but it it usually the exception and not the rule.

 

[Corki]

Exactly, and I would add that an EMHC can only do so under specific instructions from the priest or local Ordinary

This is my understanding as well. But how should an EMHC handle a situation where someone comes up for Communion who is not Catholic?

 

[Brendan]

This is my understanding as well. But how should an EMHC handle a situation where someone comes up for Communion who is not Catholic?

There is already an instruction on that from the USCCB.

old.usccb.org/liturgy/q&a/mass/communion.shtml

Non-Catholics, with certain exceptions, such as the Orthodox are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.

In any other circumstances, the Ordinary has to give positive approval, in that he has to issue specific instructions stating that a particular non-Catholic is permitted to recieve,

Absent that, a non Catholic is not to be admitted.

 

[Phemie]

As one who used to help recruit, train and schedule EM’sHC, I find this attitude sad.
When I approached someone to seek their help in this ministry, it was usually because I felt that the were mature in their faith, had a good understanding of Eucharistic theology, and knew that they were helping in a special way that was more about God & neighbor than it was about self.
Sometimes, the best thing is to lead by example.

I will admit that I have seen my share of EM’sHC that have not been trained properly, but it it usually the exception and not the rule.

Then you have parishes where they call for volunteers to be EMHCs and take any who show up. The only one I’ve ever known to question whether she could be one or not was a divorced woman from the parish I’m in now. When asked to be an EMHC she immediately said “I’m divorced, does that not disqualify me from this ministry?” She’s not remarried and there has never been a hint of improper behaviour so of course she wasn’t disqualified and she is one of our most reverent ministers.

 

[Jegudiel]

There is absolutely no way that I would ever withhold communion because I felt that someone was in a state of mortal sin. I cringe just thinking about it.

But I have withed communion before. A guy presented himself and I said “Body of Christ.” His hand remained at his sides so I moved the host towards his mouth. He pulled back. Then I said “Corpus Christi” watching for a response. He didn’t say anything and then tried to take the host out of my hand.

Something was wrong so I put the host back in the ciboria and guided him to the pastor’s line where he was also refused. I have no idea what was going on with this guy.

 

[Jegudiel]

As one who used to help recruit, train and schedule EM’sHC, I find this attitude sad.
When I approached someone to seek their help in this ministry, it was usually because I felt that the were mature in their faith, had a good understanding of Eucharistic theology, and knew that they were helping in a special way that was more about God & neighbor than it was about self.
Sometimes, the best thing is to lead by example.

I will admit that I have seen my share of EM’sHC that have not been trained properly, but it it usually the exception and not the rule.

Most of the EMsHC in my parish would have no idea what is meant by “Real Presence” if you asked them. Absolutely none. It’s very much a social thing including mingling in the sacristy before Mass.

 

[Kithrus]

There are two relevant Canons that would deny a person Holy Communion. Your comment on the state of their soul is Canon 916

There is another Canon 915, that address the current public behavior of the recipient, and is there to protect Holy Communion from scandal. The actual state of the person’s soul is immaterial. What matters is a change of public behavior.

Canon 915 is based on the theology of the Church as articulated by Aquinas.

Note, though that the determination of manifest sin must come from an ecclesial source. That would include the priest or the local Ordinary and cannot be the determination of a lay EMHC.

Agreed and confirmed.

case one the sinner is public like a politician that claims to be catholic but doesn’t act the part. Their state is already known.

Case two someone is coming to church to mock like in a clown suite or naked or something. there is also a small clause I heard where if the priest with before hand knowledge someone wanted to abuse the sacrament after taking it. aka puts it in his pocket to smash with a hammer, so that is cover too.

Those are the only two cases.

 

[pilots13]

Reminds me of the Rainbow Sash crowd at the Cathedral here in town. I believe they are a group who openly support homosexuals and opening a dialogue with the church about homosexuality (or something like that). They show up and the Cathedral once or twice a year, simply attend Mass, and when they go up for communion, they always get denied. It’s been a source of some interesting dialogue in town about who can deny communion, who should be denied, etc. I believe our current Archbishop, and our previous one, both wrote letters condemning the sashes as a political protest and that is their justification for denying them communion. I find it interesting that it’s not the gay factor that is causing them to be denied, but rather the protest side of it. Here’s a short article from a couple years back summing up the basic story.

minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/10/31/same-sex-marriage-protest/

 

[Corki]

Reminds me of the Rainbow Sash crowd at the Cathedral here in town. I believe they are a group who openly support homosexuals and opening a dialogue with the church about homosexuality (or something like that). They show up and the Cathedral once or twice a year, simply attend Mass, and when they go up for communion, they always get denied. It’s been a source of some interesting dialogue in town about who can deny communion, who should be denied, etc. I believe our current Archbishop, and our previous one, both wrote letters condemning the sashes as a political protest and that is their justification for denying them communion. I find it interesting that it’s not the gay factor that is causing them to be denied, but rather the protest side of it. Here’s a short article from a couple years back summing up the basic story.

minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/10/31/same-sex-marriage-protest/

In this case the EMHCs are denying Communion because of the direct instruction of the Bishop. The same thing happens when a Bishop makes an excommunication or other censure public. An example if the latter is when a certain pro-life politician was barred from Communion in Kansas. Once the Bishop made this public, an EMHC should act on that direction. But the OP was talking about personal knowledge of someone’s sin. It is beyond the EMHCs authority to act upon that knowledge.

 

[triumphguy]

No-one has personal knowledge of another’s sins, since freedom and intention are such important ingredients in discerning whether one sins or not.

 

[Corki]

No-one has personal knowledge of another’s sins, since freedom and intention are such important ingredients in discerning whether one sins or not.

This is not true. There are many people who sin publically. There are others whose close associates know of their sins. What we don’t know is whether they have repented of their sins and been absolved, thereby returning to a state of grace, before presenting themselves for communion.

 

[triumphguy]

Maybe it’s just me: I don’t know if someone who commits act ‘A’ has knowledge that doing ‘A’ is a sin, or whether he commits ‘A’ freely and with intent. No matter how public the act.

I don’t know anyone’s state of mind. therefore I do not know if they are in a sinful state.

I worked in a prison. I’m sure that 99.9% of the men there committed the crimes they were incarcerated for, but I would be unwilling to bet the mortgage money on the state of their minds when they committed the crimes.

Also, you are right: not knowing their state of mind, I also don’t know whether IF they had sinned they are now repentant, and have indeed already gone to confession.

 

[Corki]

Maybe it’s just me: I don’t know if someone who commits act ‘A’ has knowledge that doing ‘A’ is a sin, or whether he commits ‘A’ freely and with intent. No matter how public the act.

I don’t know anyone’s state of mind. therefore I do not know if they are in a sinful state.

I worked in a prison. I’m sure that 99.9% of the men there committed the crimes they were incarcerated for, but I would be unwilling to bet the mortgage money on the state of their minds when they committed the crimes.

Also, you are right: not knowing their state of mind, I also don’t know whether IF they had sinned they are now repentant, and have indeed already gone to confession.

In a parish setting, you are going to hopefully know many of the people who go for Communion more closely. A few examples come to mind. Let’s say you are the victim of someone’s sin - the innocent spouse of someone committing adultery, the person who caught someone in a serious lie. Or let’s say you are the brother of someone you know is divorced and remarried without an annullment. You would have personal knowledge of these people’s sins, even if they were not public. Other sins are very public such as drug dealers or abortion doctors. All of these are examples of people who are not properly disposed to receive Communion unless they have been absolved in the Sacrament of Confession.

 

[triumphguy]

Corki: if one of my own brothers came up to me for communion as an EMHC and I knew he had committed adutlery (and they haven’t that I know of ) I still wouldn’t know the state of their mind or their soul and whether they were in a state of sin at that moment.

Anyway, canonically me knowing about someone’s sin is different from “publicly sinning”.

Furthermore, without direction from the Bishop or pastor I’m not going to deny communion to anyone.

I was going to say unless they were obviously drunk or stoned, and then I remembered a Franciscan friar (Bro. Brendan) who was picked up by the police while out walking, for being intoxicated in public. He was held over night! He had MS and was walking for exercise. The police had some major apologizing to do.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

No-one has personal knowledge of another’s sins, since freedom and intention are such important ingredients in discerning whether one sins or not.

This is not true. There are many people who sin publically. There are others whose close associates know of their sins. What we don’t know is whether they have repented of their sins and been absolved, thereby returning to a state of grace, before presenting themselves for communion.

Actually it is true.

While you may have knowledge of the actions of someone that are sinful you have no way of knowing if they are mortal sins because you can not know if the person has full knowledge and fully consented to committing the sinful act. If either one of those is impaired then it is not a mortal sin.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

In a parish setting, you are going to hopefully know many of the people who go for Communion more closely. A few examples come to mind. Let’s say you are the victim of someone’s sin - the innocent spouse of someone committing adultery, the person who caught someone in a serious lie. Or let’s say you are the brother of someone you know is divorced and remarried without an annullment. You would have personal knowledge of these people’s sins, even if they were not public. Other sins are very public such as drug dealers or abortion doctors. All of these are examples of people who are not properly disposed to receive Communion unless they have been absolved in the Sacrament of Confession.

In none of these cases would you be able to know that the person committed the sin with full consent and full knowledge. All you know is that the matter was grave in nature.

 

[Kathryn_Ann]

Quoting Brendan:

There are two relevant Canons that would deny a person Holy Communion. Your comment on the state of their soul is Canon 916

There is another Canon 915, that address the current public behavior of the recipient, and is there to protect Holy Communion from scandal. The actual state of the person’s soul is immaterial. What matters is a change of public behavior.

Quote:
Can. 915 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.

Can. 916 A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.
Canon 915 is based on the theology of the Church as articulated by Aquinas.

Quote:
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, III:q 80: article 6
“A distinction must be made among sinners: some are secret; others are notorious, either from evidence of the fact, as public usurers, or public robbers or from being denounced as evil men by some ecclesiastical or civil tribunal. Therefore Holy Communion ought not to be given to open sinners when they ask for it.”
Note, though that the determination of manifest sin must come from an ecclesial source. That would include the priest or the local Ordinary and cannot be the determination of a lay EMHC.

---

Brendan

Brendan, this is very quote worthy and helpful. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. It is not, as seen above, always a matter of individuals judging other’s private behavior, but sometimes a matter of public scandal or other reasons. I appreciate having the above statements to clarify the issues.
Kathryn Ann

 

[Corki]

In none of these cases would you be able to know that the person committed the sin with full consent and full knowledge. All you know is that the matter was grave in nature.

I disagree. If you are the spouse of a man committing adultery, you know that the sin is committed with full consent and full knowledge. If you are a “Catholic” doctor who performs abortions, everyone knows you are committing mortal sin. If you have enough knowledge to present yourself for Communion, you have the knowledge to know that some things (adultery, abortion) are mortal sins. And I can’t even imagine a scenario where either of those - an adulterous spouse or an abortion “doctor” isn’t acting with full consent.

However, I didn’t say that an EMHC should turn such people away. Only that it is very possible for someone, an EMHC or others in the parish, to have real knowledge that a person has committed a mortal sin. The only unknown factor, in those cases, would be whether the person had repented and been absolved before presenting himself for Communion.

 

[Corki]

Corki: if one of my own brothers came up to me for communion as an EMHC and I knew he had committed adutlery (and they haven’t that I know of ) I still wouldn’t know the state of their mind or their soul and whether they were in a state of sin at that moment.

Exactly. It’s not a matter of state of mind, but you don’t know the state of their soul. I clearly stated that the person should not be refused communion, since the EMHC does not know if the person has restored the state of his soul through repentance and Confession. That’s not the same as not knowing that they sinned. One is knowledge of a past action and the other is knowledge of a present state of grace.