Sacrilege

  • Thread starter Thread starter Churchman25
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Churchman25

Guest
I was just wondering since taking the host in a state of grave sin is sacrilege does this incur (automatic excommunication) for people who know the law and its penalties?

I was just wondering because it says on the catechism site that if someone"takes or retains the host for a sacrilegious purpose". hey are automatically excommunicated.

Or are they also referring to taking the host in mortal sin or some Satanic occult practice?
 
Churchman25 said:
Or are they also referring to taking the host in mortal sin or some Satanic occult practice?
Click to expand...
This I believe is the answer. It is a grave sacrilege to knowingly receive Holy Communion while in a state of mortal sin, but I haven’t been able to find anything that says this incurs excommunication.
 
Churchman25 said:
I was just wondering since taking the host in a state of grave sin is sacrilege does this incur (automatic excommunication) for people who know the law and its penalties?

I was just wondering because it says on the catechism site that if someone"takes or retains the host for a sacrilegious purpose". hey are automatically excommunicated.

Or are they also referring to taking the host in mortal sin or some Satanic occult practice?
Click to expand...
Hello,

This is an instance where the phrase “taking Communion” can have unintended implications.

When we receive (that is, consume) Communion, we are not “taking” Communion as that word is used in regard to excommunication. The “taking or retaining” means holding on or carrying away, not consuming.

So, no, a person who receives Communion while in a state of mortal sin is not excommunicated as a result.

Dan
 
dans0622 said:
Hello,This is an instance where the phrase “taking Communion” can have unintended implications.
When we receive (that is, consume) Communion, we are not “taking” Communion as that word is used in regard to excommunication. The “taking or retaining” means holding on or carrying away, not consuming. So, no, a person who receives Communion while in a state of mortal sin is not excommunicated as a result. Dan
Click to expand...
The way I was brought up, “taking Communion” was receiving the Sacrament. How is it possible to take it and not consume it?
 
zamyrabyrd said:
The way I was brought up, “taking Communion” was receiving the Sacrament. How is it possible to take it and not consume it?
Click to expand...
The more accurate term would be “receiving,” because we do not take the Body of Christ by our own volition. God (through the priest) gives it to us like a mother bird feeding her babies.
 
It means taking a consecrated host physically from the church. You are supposed to consume it immediately…there was a thread a few months back about a group taking them for some blasphemous ‘art’ project. Since taking it in your hand is the norm for many, it wouldn’t be that hard to palm one and leave the church with it.
 
Catholic4Christ said:
The more accurate term would be “receiving,” because we do not take the Body of Christ by our own volition. God (through the priest) gives it to us like a mother bird feeding her babies.
Click to expand...
Depends on your definition of the term. The Latin is actually “Accipite” (as in accipio, accepi, acceptus), so cognitively speaking, the more “literal” translation would be “accept.” However, “receiving” has fewer negative connotations than “taking” in English so “receiving” has become more accepted in a sacred environment.
 
I did not mean to get into the relative merits of using the phrase “take Communion” (although I don’t use it myself) versus “receive Communion.”

I only meant to show that the phrase “take Communion” can be used to mean “consume Communion” and this is certainly *not *what is meant by “take Communion” in the context of the automatic excommunication for desecration of the Holy Eucharist. “Take”, in that context, means to hold on to or carry away, *without *consuming, for a sacrilegious purpose (see canon 1367).

Dan
 
dans0622 said:
I did not mean to get into the relative merits of using the phrase “take Communion” (although I don’t use it myself) versus “receive Communion.”

I only meant to show that the phrase “take Communion” can be used to mean “consume Communion” and this is certainly *not *what is meant by “take Communion” in the context of the automatic excommunication for desecration of the Holy Eucharist. “Take”, in that context, means to hold on to or carry away, *without *consuming, for a sacrilegious purpose (see canon 1367).

Dan
Click to expand...
Right. It seems “Take AND Eat” (as in the actual wording of the English translation) would be more appropriate to our discussion. Your point well-taken.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top