What to do about non Catholic husband insisting on receiving communion?
- Status
K
KarenAnne
Guest
K
KarenAnne
Guest
I wish it were so…he has pretty much made it clear he has no desire whatsoever to join the catholic church
K
KarenAnne
Guest
Yes I have
Formal confession to a priest is also something he does not believe is necessary…confess his sins to God directly is what he says he does…I am thankful that he wants to receive I just wish it were within the guidelines of the teachings of the Church 
K
KarenAnne
Guest
He is not trying to assert anything. He is following his conscience. And, a properly formed conscience can vary from person to person.
K
KarenAnne
Guest
Exactly. Thank you
K
KarenAnne
Guest
Thank you
you made some very good points He does have a much more inclusive belief about communion, which many non-Catholic Christians do. Even the pope, it seems, has a more inclusive belief re communion than some Catholics.
But he doesn’t seem to be forcing his beliefs onto anyone else…he’s just doing his thing quietly. Yet…it bothers his wife.
Which is why I suggest that if it upsets her so much, she should suggest they go to different churches. I think it’s quite game of him to go to a church that he is not a member of–perhaps he really likes going to church with his wife every Sunday.
If she told the priest about this, would he stop giving her husband communion or keep allowing it? He just might keep allowing it.
IMO the husband should go to a church where the others share his beliefs and he doesn’t have to, as you put it, “assert Protestant belief”.
That way, he gets communion…and the OP doesn’t have to worry herself about it.
.
K
KarenAnne
Guest
EXACTLY!!! My husband is no pansy and I am certainly not in a position to tell him how he can and cannot worship; that is not my place nor is it my desire to do so. I am extremely grateful that he does not have a problem with me going to the church of my choice
M
MorEphrem
Guest
With all due respect, there is a particular danger in (even subconsciously) seeking validation rather than an objective response. Correctly speaking, he should not receive communion. He is not configured to the mystical Body of Christ in this way, and he is bringing condemnation upon himself by the improper reception of the sacrament (cf. 1 Cor. 11:29), as well as any complacent allowance is a sacrilege.EXACTLY!!! My husband is no pansy and I am certainly not in a position to tell him how he can and cannot worship; that is not my place nor is it my desire to do so. I am extremely grateful that he does not have a problem with me going to the church of my choice
I strongly recommend informing your priest. It is not a matter of forcing him not to receive - it’s about caring for the salvation of his soul and the proper treatment of the body and blood of our Lord.
E
edlinked
Guest
It appears that this is a problem of understandings of the faith. I would think your husband is of the mindset that all Christians are part of the “one church of God” just because they believe in Christ. Not necessarily of the same beliefs and traditions. So one acknowledges any “pastor” of any church as having the certain guidance given by the Holy Spirit.
I would say that you should learn about apologetics and have some chats with him in the context of line of thoughts (to seek truth), with the knowledge that things will take some time. Because the way someone changes their belief system is kind of “weird” (meaning that sometimes some things that you didn’t think could do a difference are the things that do the difference. The mindset is that we are not going to make someone change, maybe we will plant the seeds but the Holy Spirit is the one that acts). I would say to see things from John Martignoni in the Bible Christian Society. I like the way he explains things as he explains why we believe on certain things by explaining the way to interpret the Bible, as the Catholic Church would state. But he does it in a “sequential” line of thought, meaning that one thing leads to another.
biblechristiansociety.com/home
One good thing though, is that he has accepted that catholics are Christians, some denominations don’t think like that, they think the Pope is the antichrist.
Now, the problem that I should state to him, is that in the catholic faith, we need a certain purity, cleanliness, to take the Eucharist. This is the point he needs to analyze more and read more about. It is not enough to believe in Christ, but it is important that our faith takes us to act solemnly towards divinity. And part of it includes the sacraments, particularly the sacrament of confession. You are acting your faith in good conscience when your understandings makes you act with the reverence needed. But just because you think something is correct doesn’t mean you are acting in a correct way. That’s why we need to study and analyze things. The fear of God can come, but His knowledge is always a journey, a journey that will be decided by ones sincerity in truly knowing divinity, God. That’s why it is a problem when we are not focus or are too open to every interpretation in things of faith, because we can believe many things that are not of Him. One of these things comes to the problem of infallibility, or who is infallible in the things of faith.
Here is a good explanation on good and evil to some sense (though “Love and responsibility” talks about the correct relationship of man and woman, but it explains the conscience part in a nice way):
{"
In discussing the good and evil of human acts, St Thomas applies the Dionysian formula, i.e., “Evil results from any single defect, but good from the complete cause.” This means that a morally good act requires the goodness of all its sources together, namely of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances, including the consequences.
Action in conformity with conscience is thus always morally good, but it is not at the same time always morally right. However, conscience, even if being erroneous, always obliges to action in conformity with it, because the one who errs does not know by definition about his error. The possibility of making a mistake in such an essential issue inclines one toward particular care for the accuracy of one’s moral recognitions. The only way you guarantee this accuracy is to strive for ever deeper knowledge of who man is in his objective structure. To present precisely this structure of man, a man and a woman, within the totality of their vocation to reciprocal love, is the main task of this book. "
”} Footnote From Love and Responsibility by Karol Wojtyla
I remembered this scripture when reading this thread:
“25 He leaned back against Jesus’ chest and said to him, “Master, who is it?” 26 Jesus answered, “It is the one to whom I hand the morsel 9 after I have dipped it.” So he dipped the morsel and (took it and) handed it to Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot. 27 After he took the morsel, Satan entered him. So Jesus said to him, “What you are going to do, do quickly.”” John 13, 25-27
9 [26] Morsel: probably the bitter herb dipped in salt water.
I would say that you should learn about apologetics and have some chats with him in the context of line of thoughts (to seek truth), with the knowledge that things will take some time. Because the way someone changes their belief system is kind of “weird” (meaning that sometimes some things that you didn’t think could do a difference are the things that do the difference. The mindset is that we are not going to make someone change, maybe we will plant the seeds but the Holy Spirit is the one that acts). I would say to see things from John Martignoni in the Bible Christian Society. I like the way he explains things as he explains why we believe on certain things by explaining the way to interpret the Bible, as the Catholic Church would state. But he does it in a “sequential” line of thought, meaning that one thing leads to another.
biblechristiansociety.com/home
One good thing though, is that he has accepted that catholics are Christians, some denominations don’t think like that, they think the Pope is the antichrist.
Now, the problem that I should state to him, is that in the catholic faith, we need a certain purity, cleanliness, to take the Eucharist. This is the point he needs to analyze more and read more about. It is not enough to believe in Christ, but it is important that our faith takes us to act solemnly towards divinity. And part of it includes the sacraments, particularly the sacrament of confession. You are acting your faith in good conscience when your understandings makes you act with the reverence needed. But just because you think something is correct doesn’t mean you are acting in a correct way. That’s why we need to study and analyze things. The fear of God can come, but His knowledge is always a journey, a journey that will be decided by ones sincerity in truly knowing divinity, God. That’s why it is a problem when we are not focus or are too open to every interpretation in things of faith, because we can believe many things that are not of Him. One of these things comes to the problem of infallibility, or who is infallible in the things of faith.
Here is a good explanation on good and evil to some sense (though “Love and responsibility” talks about the correct relationship of man and woman, but it explains the conscience part in a nice way):
{"
In discussing the good and evil of human acts, St Thomas applies the Dionysian formula, i.e., “Evil results from any single defect, but good from the complete cause.” This means that a morally good act requires the goodness of all its sources together, namely of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances, including the consequences.
Action in conformity with conscience is thus always morally good, but it is not at the same time always morally right. However, conscience, even if being erroneous, always obliges to action in conformity with it, because the one who errs does not know by definition about his error. The possibility of making a mistake in such an essential issue inclines one toward particular care for the accuracy of one’s moral recognitions. The only way you guarantee this accuracy is to strive for ever deeper knowledge of who man is in his objective structure. To present precisely this structure of man, a man and a woman, within the totality of their vocation to reciprocal love, is the main task of this book. "
”} Footnote From Love and Responsibility by Karol Wojtyla
I remembered this scripture when reading this thread:
“25 He leaned back against Jesus’ chest and said to him, “Master, who is it?” 26 Jesus answered, “It is the one to whom I hand the morsel 9 after I have dipped it.” So he dipped the morsel and (took it and) handed it to Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot. 27 After he took the morsel, Satan entered him. So Jesus said to him, “What you are going to do, do quickly.”” John 13, 25-27
9 [26] Morsel: probably the bitter herb dipped in salt water.
E
edlinked
Guest
I would tell him to talk to a priest, because I would say the basis of the problem is about what one understands, and he can ask to the priest all the things he has to say on what he believes, but then he has to hear the priests explanation, and analyze them and cope with them or toss them aside, as probably they will not coincide with his understandings.
Truth will make us free, but truth is not about relative truth, the one that makes sense to me, but about obedience to the truth of God, this is an act of humility. So be truthful to the faith and give the rules of the faith to the ones that don’t know them, we need clarity. Some might want depth on the responses and answers, therefore one needs to analyze and study to have that depth.
Seek this opportunity to understand the differences of salvation of our catholic faith, from that of protestants. In Catholicism one needs by our free will to decide to act the faith (to say yes to Gods way in the space of time as we can say no later) according to the tradition passed through the apostles, to the specific clergy of the Church, and the Church passes them to us. It is not about any tradition, it is the one given by God, the one given by Jesus to the apostles. It comes down to what kind of faith we want. That of man or the one that comes directly from the almighty through the means He has appointed. It is interesting to read or find out about the early Fathers of the Church (see the program on youtube journey home, those are great for this kind of things. Marcus Grodi has a site, maybe you should check that).
But let him understand that he is more than welcome in the church, but that he needs to learn more to understand what the Church truly teaches. Maybe he will find it “annoying”, maybe not, but we need to decide what we want to do. To eat the Eucharist in a state of uncleanliness is not a good thing, it is an act of “insulting” the divinity, this is a point that he might find interesting, if he wants to respect God truly. The same way you will not try to sin for God. The ways of the Church are to act with reverence, not about annoying someone, but that reverence only comes by faith.
I would let him know that this action is important for your faith. And if he respects you he will not do whatever he pleases in the sense of acting irreverent to your faith. I guess we need a middle ground here at least to start, that’s a thing about respect, and more importantly on things of God. God wants married couples to respect themselves, and in this case I would say, he wants to make his way the way. So the point of clearing your sentiment is about respecting God, therefore on this instance it is a talk about God, for he should have a sense that he could be mistaken, as he is not infallible, then he needs to seek knowledge. But be patient, just be clear on your sentiment, it is not about causing a struggle or a problem out of it, but it is about getting closer to God, which I believe is a thing that both want in this case. Talk to a priest though, I would believe he would have more knowledge on how can this things go.
Hope everything goes good, and always keep praying (this is a must).
Truth will make us free, but truth is not about relative truth, the one that makes sense to me, but about obedience to the truth of God, this is an act of humility. So be truthful to the faith and give the rules of the faith to the ones that don’t know them, we need clarity. Some might want depth on the responses and answers, therefore one needs to analyze and study to have that depth.
Seek this opportunity to understand the differences of salvation of our catholic faith, from that of protestants. In Catholicism one needs by our free will to decide to act the faith (to say yes to Gods way in the space of time as we can say no later) according to the tradition passed through the apostles, to the specific clergy of the Church, and the Church passes them to us. It is not about any tradition, it is the one given by God, the one given by Jesus to the apostles. It comes down to what kind of faith we want. That of man or the one that comes directly from the almighty through the means He has appointed. It is interesting to read or find out about the early Fathers of the Church (see the program on youtube journey home, those are great for this kind of things. Marcus Grodi has a site, maybe you should check that).
But let him understand that he is more than welcome in the church, but that he needs to learn more to understand what the Church truly teaches. Maybe he will find it “annoying”, maybe not, but we need to decide what we want to do. To eat the Eucharist in a state of uncleanliness is not a good thing, it is an act of “insulting” the divinity, this is a point that he might find interesting, if he wants to respect God truly. The same way you will not try to sin for God. The ways of the Church are to act with reverence, not about annoying someone, but that reverence only comes by faith.
I would let him know that this action is important for your faith. And if he respects you he will not do whatever he pleases in the sense of acting irreverent to your faith. I guess we need a middle ground here at least to start, that’s a thing about respect, and more importantly on things of God. God wants married couples to respect themselves, and in this case I would say, he wants to make his way the way. So the point of clearing your sentiment is about respecting God, therefore on this instance it is a talk about God, for he should have a sense that he could be mistaken, as he is not infallible, then he needs to seek knowledge. But be patient, just be clear on your sentiment, it is not about causing a struggle or a problem out of it, but it is about getting closer to God, which I believe is a thing that both want in this case. Talk to a priest though, I would believe he would have more knowledge on how can this things go.
Hope everything goes good, and always keep praying (this is a must).
R
Rosebud77
Guest
Odd word to use
R
Rosebud77
Guest
Wise lady and yes…EXACTLY!!! My husband is no pansy and I am certainly not in a position to tell him how he can and cannot worship; that is not my place nor is it my desire to do so. I am extremely grateful that he does not have a problem with me going to the church of my choice
When I came to Ireland I was still Church of England, although I had been living far from other than enthusistic TV and radio any contact with any Church
I was then living as a hermit. Quite openly
I knew I would nto align with my childhood church; there had been abuse to me. Judgments made etc.
Although I made initial contact with the Church of Ireland,t hey are scattered here.I was surrounded by Roman Catholics and the house I rented had cupboards full of Roman Catholic books etc
So of course I went to Mass and of course I told every priest who I was etc, And to a man they welcomed me to take communion. Rarely any question and an transition was made very simply and easily.
Individual conscience is an interesting thing. And questioning and challenging, which I was never subjected to thankfully, is counter productive and arouses feelings that are not germane. In fact the local clergy had no idea how to receive into the Church and tried to persuade me to stay as I was, knowing I had read all the Vatican 2 documents etc and the lifestyle I was adhering to.
That in fact became the only area of conflict and that was hard indeed. Almost finished me.
I read a piece Pope Benedict wrote re the primacy of individual conscience. Of course he went on to say that he hoped it would be later guided by the rules of the Church but that was not to him mandatory.
Let him be and leave him and this to Jesus. Please…He is on a road;let him walk it
P
pianistclare
Guest
Exactly. If you are “not in a position” to tell him he is committing a serious error, then who is?
If you KNOW it’s wrong, and you allow it, then you will have to answer for it as well.
Talk to your priest. He has encountered this many times before.
M
MorEphrem
Guest
Very deliberately used, especially for a Latin West audience. I am figuring if he is a protestant he is potentially actually baptized, but probably never confirmed or ever communed. If that is the case, he is not “configured” in that he is not truly [fully] part of the Mystical Body of Christ and, therefore, cannot be communed.Odd word to use
P
pianistclare
Guest
**The only thing correct in this post is that feelings are not germane. **
That’s for sure.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Agreed. Yet, that’s not my assertion. I’m asserting only that, if he’s a part of a Protestant community that says that communion isn’t “body, blood, soul, and divinity”, and yet he himself believes that it is, then it’s time for him to start asking “if I believe in the True Presence, against my denomination’s belief, then it’s time to start asking why I believe what Catholics believe.”
From a Catholic perspective, that’s an unreasonable belief. One has only to read the ECFs to recognize that they, too, did not share that belief.
It is possible. It’s just not reasonable.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Nope. You’re still missing what I’m saying. You asserted that each person decides whether they should receive the Eucharist; I’m saying that each Catholic gets to make that decision (while non-Catholics don’t have that right). That being said, the OP’s husband is exercising a right reserved to Catholics. This isn’t an issue of ‘conscience’ on his part, but an issue of him imposing his will on his wife and her parish community.
That doesn’t mean that he’s right (even if he ‘feels’ he’s right).
LOL… cute!
Mayans were non-Catholics who followed their conscience in performing human sacrifice. Are you saying that their example of “following their conscience” is salutory?
That’s fine, and I believe you’re correct in that assertion – many non-Catholic Christians do believe in this way. Yet, that doesn’t mean that it’s a reasonable basis for his actions in the context of a Catholic Mass. After all, many non-Muslims have a more inclusive belief about eating pork… but does that mean that these non-Muslims have the right to walk into the Dome of the Rock and assert that they have the right to eat BBQ pork there, just because they believe it’s ok? Of course not…!
That’d be relevant… if this ‘more inclusive belief’ you assert (without description or attribution) was that non-Catholic Christians can regularly receive the Eucharist at Catholic liturgies… which isn’t the case.
Nice… but wrong. He’s forcing his beliefs that non-Catholics may communicate at Catholic Masses upon the parish at which he attends Mass.
He might. And, if he did so, then he’d be objectively in error.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
If a non-Catholic is determined to receive Holy Communion in a Catholic church, he/she will get it, if the priest/EMHCs do not know anything about him. So it is wrong for him/her to do that.
Holy Communion is sacred. Catholics who love their faith and believe in this would do anything within their capacity to stop it from happening.
It is a delicate matter for the OP, as the person is her husband and more, it could affect the relationship which she mentioned herself.
Yet, wrong is wrong. I don’t have the solution but perhaps in a selfish way, she could tell the priest about it and let him decides. Of course that’s putting the priest in an unenviable situation to enforce the rule of the Church on this husband.
Ultimately he has to respect his wife’s religion rule even if he disagrees with it.
Holy Communion is sacred. Catholics who love their faith and believe in this would do anything within their capacity to stop it from happening.
It is a delicate matter for the OP, as the person is her husband and more, it could affect the relationship which she mentioned herself.
Yet, wrong is wrong. I don’t have the solution but perhaps in a selfish way, she could tell the priest about it and let him decides. Of course that’s putting the priest in an unenviable situation to enforce the rule of the Church on this husband.
Ultimately he has to respect his wife’s religion rule even if he disagrees with it.
R
Rosebud77
Guest
Padre Pio frequently gave communion knowingly to non catholics and even on on occasion to an atheist. Pope John Paul gave communion to Br Roger of Taize who was a lay monk in a “protestant” tradition.
I was given communion frequently and knowingly when not RC and I know Franciscan Friars here who do the same
- Status