Ut unum sint

[TruthSeaker]

In his encyclical “Ut unum sint”, Blessed Pope John Paul II wrote:

“In this context, it is a source of joy to note that Catholic ministers are able, in certain particular cases, to administer the Sacraments of the Eucharist, Penance and Anointing of the Sick to Christians who are not in full communion with the Catholic Church but who greatly desire to receive these sacraments, freely request them and manifest the faith which the Catholic Church professes with regard to these sacraments.”

This is puzzling because I have always understood that the Catholic sacraments, and most particularly the Eucharist are reserved exclusively for reception by members of Catholic churches which are in full communion with Rome and (for reception of the Eucharist) that the recipient be in a state of grace. What are the “certain particular cases” which John Paul II refers which abrogate this requirement? What exact beliefs are meant by “faith” in the statement: “… and manifest the faith which the Catholic Church professes with regard to these sacraments”?

I have heard that some priests use the excerpt from this John Paul II encyclical as justification for the casual distribution of the Eucharist to known non-Catholics at regular celebrations of the Mass. This may also occur at weddings or funerals for example when a priest “invites” ALL Christians in attendance to come and partake in our communal feast in the spirit of ecumenism". It seems that this is a distortion of the message in “Ut unum sint”.

What exactly is proper?

 

[TrueLight]

In his encyclical “Ut unum sint”, Blessed Pope John Paul II wrote:

“In this context, it is a source of joy to note that Catholic ministers are able, in certain particular cases, to administer the Sacraments of the Eucharist, Penance and Anointing of the Sick to Christians who are not in full communion with the Catholic Church but who greatly desire to receive these sacraments, freely request them and manifest the faith which the Catholic Church professes with regard to these sacraments.”

This is puzzling because I have always understood that the Catholic sacraments, and most particularly the Eucharist are reserved exclusively for reception by members of Catholic churches which are in full communion with Rome and (for reception of the Eucharist) that the recipient be in a state of grace. What are the “certain particular cases” which John Paul II refers which abrogate this requirement? What exact beliefs are meant by “faith” in the statement: “… and manifest the faith which the Catholic Church professes with regard to these sacraments”?

I have heard that some priests use the excerpt from this John Paul II encyclical as justification for the casual distribution of the Eucharist to known non-Catholics at regular celebrations of the Mass. This may also occur at weddings or funerals for example when a priest “invites” ALL Christians in attendance to come and partake in our communal feast in the spirit of ecumenism". It seems that this is a distortion of the message in “Ut unum sint”.

What exactly is proper?

Wow. If that’s what it means, where can I get in line?

 

[hazcompat]

These are signs of convergence which regard various aspects of the sacramental life. Certainly, due to disagreements in matters of faith, it is not yet possible to celebrate together the same Eucharistic Liturgy. And yet we do have a burning desire to join in celebrating the one Eucharist of the Lord, and this desire itself is already a common prayer of praise, a single supplication. Together we speak to the Father and increasingly we do so “with one heart”. At times it seems that we are closer to being able finally to seal this “real although not yet full” communion. A century ago who could even have imagined such a thing?

1. In this context, it is a source of joy to note that Catholic ministers are able, in certain particular cases, to administer the Sacraments of the Eucharist, Penance and Anointing of the Sick to Christians who are not in full communion with the Catholic Church but who greatly desire to receive these sacraments, freely request them and manifest the faith which the Catholic Church professes with regard to these sacraments. Conversely, in specific cases and in particular circumstances, Catholics too can request these same sacraments from ministers of Churches in which these sacraments are valid. The conditions for such reciprocal reception have been laid down in specific norms; for the sake of furthering ecumenism these norms must be respected.78

peace

 

[hazcompat]

Hey, we could have all used the end of the world earlier today as circumstance?

peace

 

[mrose1]

Without going totally down a rabbit hole, I would mention to the OP that it is just as prohibited to receive any of the “Sacraments of the Living” in a State of Mortal Sin as it is the Eucharist: this includes Confirmation, Matrimony, and Holy Orders. Additionally, one ought to go to Confession prior to receiving the Anointing of the Sick, if possible.

I have often wondered, along the line of thinking displayed in something like this encyclical, how sacraments may be given to those who are not in a State of Grace. If the faculty to hear confessions is dependent upon the Local Ordinary, then certainly it would appear that members non-Catholic Churches (in the proper sense) cannot be objectively in the State of Grace, despite their possessing real Holy Orders. And there is certainly zero grey area about that when it comes to admitting Protestants to Holy Communion, etc.

I suppose that at best I do not understand this…

 

[1ke]

From Canon Law:

Can. 844 §1. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments licitly to Catholic members of the Christian faithful alone, who likewise receive them licitly from Catholic ministers alone, without prejudice to the prescripts of §§2, 3, and 4 of this canon, and ⇒ can. 861, §2.

§2. Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.

§3. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick licitly to members of Eastern Churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church if they seek such on their own accord and are properly disposed. This is also valid for members of other Churches which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition in regard to the sacraments as these Eastern Churches.

§4. If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.

§5. For the cases mentioned in §§2, 3, and 4, the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops is not to issue general norms except after consultation at least with the local competent authority of the interested non-Catholic Church or community.

 

[flower_lady]

Interesting because only a couple of weeks ago, I went to confession and took my grandson with me. He so badly wants to be a catholic, he is 12 years old. He asked me to ask the priest if he could please come to confession after I went in and so I did. The priest told me no he could not. I wasn’t angry, but at the same time I see no reason why he should not have been able to confess his sins. Isn’t that what Jesus sent them into the world to do. Forgive sins? I’ll have to read up on this issue. In fact let me take the time to read all of the post.I only read the first 2.