Why not distribute unconsecrated bread and wine at Mass to those unable to take part in the Eucharist?

[ByzCathCantor]

You can kill a person by feeding them the wrong food, especially starving ones.

I think that the best approach is to invite everybody to donuts and coffee in the parish hall after Mass for some nice Christian socialization.

Yep, the donuts and coffee would certain not be as potentially harmful to one’s health.

 

[Cristiano]

This is ridiculous and stinks of the fetid fruit of modernist mindsets where everyone is equal and the focus is on mealtime (versus the Sacrifice of the Mass). It’s confusing; it erodes the entire point. It’s like a booth for kissing the best man so no one feels left out that only the bride and groom got to kiss. In context of the Eucharist, this is a despicable idea.

Why would I want to kiss the best man? That would really scare my wife.

 

[ConstantineTG]

No one would dispute that, yet that is not the nature of the custom and tradition, as you are aware.

Of course. I’m just clarifying that MarMax’s comments aren’t targetted against our Eastern traditions, but rather he doesn’t like the idea of instituting a “Communion Lite” practice for non-believers. So we shouldn’t take offense on it, he isn’t trying to shoot down the age-old traditions of the East here.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

Of course. I’m just clarifying that MarMax’s comments aren’t targetted against our Eastern traditions, but rather he doesn’t like the idea of instituting a “Communion Lite” practice for non-believers. So we shouldn’t take offense on it, he isn’t trying to shoot down the age-old traditions of the East here.

That wasn’t entirely clear, but I’ll take your word for it

 

[veilofveronica]

It is clear from many threads on CAF that the prohibition on taking part in the Eucharist for non-Catholics, and Catholics in some situations causes distress and confusion.

Could this not be overcome at least in part by the distribution to these people of unconsecrated bread and wine, with appropriate words being said (other than 'body of Christ etc)?

Leaving aside the obvious practical considerations (conventions for avoiding people getting muddled as to which was which etc) is there any reason why this could not be done? And if there is a rule against it, would it not be helpful if the rule were changed?

Hi there,

I think that you hit (one of the nails) on the head when you said that it would be muddled.

The Mass is more then a worship or prayer service. It is celebrating the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, where the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus. To distribute unconsecrated bread and wine at Mass would not be what the Mass “is” and would not make for unity. There would be no point to it. The people receiving would be in disharmony and would be receiving a wafer and wine that were unconsecrated. If anything, I think that would be LESS welcoming then recommending that they receive a blessing from the priest or remain seated.

The Mass is not just regulated by Church rule or dogma…it’s regulated by how Jesus implemented it at the Last Supper when it comes to the Consecration. That isn’t something that’s able to be changed.

If a person does not believe in transubstantation (where the bread and wine becomes the Body and Blood of Christ) or in beliefs of the Catholic Church, they can seek membership in another Christian church that doesn’t teach this doctrine (we are the only ones that do.), or, pray and explore it. It can be difficult to accept at first and sometimes it takes time.

If people want to receive Communion, they can seek info about RCIA, and make an Act of Spiritual Communion until they can receive.

It isn’t that Catholics are trying to be restrictive or exclusive, it’s that this is the Holiest of Sacraments and central to our belief system. One needs to be in unity with the Church and to have proper instruction before receiving Communion.

Hope this helps.

 

[ConstantineTG]

That wasn’t entirely clear, but I’ll take your word for it

That is how I understand it in light of the topic of the thread. And if you think about it, we don’t distribute the blessed bread for that reason as well.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

That is how I understand it in light of the topic of the thread. And if you think about it, we don’t distribute the blessed bread for that reason as well.

No we certainly don’t.

Perhaps as you suggest this is a late response to the OP, although it landed in the middle of a sidebar (but related) discussion within the thread.

 

[ConstantineTG]

No we certainly don’t.

Perhaps as you suggest this is a late response to the OP, although it landed in the middle of a sidebar (but related) discussion within the thread.

Yeah, unfortunately I am guilty of that too. I come into a thread late, respond to the OP, and have my post sitting in the middle of a heated discussion

 

[Celtic_Maiden]

You can kill a person by feeding them the wrong food, especially starving ones.

I think that the best approach is to invite everybody to donuts and coffee in the parish hall after Mass for some nice Christian socialization.

Well done that is a great idea donutsand coffee in the parish hall for a “Get to know you” while at Mass we observe what the Catholic Church teaches that you have to be a Catholic to receive the Eucharist, if non Catholics feel left out they are always welcome to join the One ,Holy, Apostolic Church via RCIA and then receive themselves, otherwise grape juice and bread as is observed in the Protestant will have to suffice, the laws of God was made for man, not the other way around as the person who is a non believer proposed, who cannot understand the Church’s teaching and the reverence that is placed on the Body and Blood of the Lord, and the consequences as Our Lord said of receiving it unworthily, who wants to offer a placebo to anyone, all are welcome into the Church to pray and unite with us, but unlesss you believe and are a Catholic we have to keep Communion as reverent as possible and not offering a placebo which in itself is not respectfull to the Lord or to the person and brings our religion into disrepute and the Protestants will think we have come over to there side of thinking and we only regard it as a symbol. Satan has a field day with putting all sort of things into people’s minds and to interfere with the Catholic Church.

 

[farallon]

Why should non-Catholics get the Eucharist? Why should they be in our churches? Why should they get unconsecrated bread and wine? There is no reason for them to get it.

If the Catholic Church wants to have a closed communion, that is their business. Having been raised Protestant, I do not fully understand that position. I do, however, respect it. As to why a non-catholic should be in a Catholic church, I can think of several reasons. Perhaps they are married to a Catholic and want to share that part of their life with them. Maybe they are interested in Catholicism and want to learn more. I think that your statement is very close minded and is not in line with Catholic teaching. I am not Catholic, but attend a Catholic church with my wife and children. I have heard the priest talk about say many times that the church is open to all and that it is the position of the church to teach God’s love.

 

[MarMax]

If the Catholic Church wants to have a closed communion, that is their business. Having been raised Protestant, I do not fully understand that position. I do, however, respect it. As to why a non-catholic should be in a Catholic church, I can think of several reasons. Perhaps they are married to a Catholic and want to share that part of their life with them. Maybe they are interested in Catholicism and want to learn more. I think that your statement is very close minded and is not in line with Catholic teaching. I am not Catholic, but attend a Catholic church with my wife and children. I have heard the priest talk about say many times that the church is open to all and that it is the position of the church to teach God’s love.

Having been raised Protestant myself…

Because Protestants don’t have the Real Presence. No one can eat or drink judgement unto themselves with mere bread and grape juice/wine. Unless they choke to death and are in mortal sin… yowza.

But in the Church, closed Communion is in fact an action of charity, mercy, justice… common sense!

To allow a non-Catholic to profane Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament is like handing a person a pistol and saying they should check if it’s loaded by pointing it at their head and pulling the trigger. It leaves the person in Judgement of a negative fashion, having not believed, and it renders Judgement unto the Priest because he is ignoring the gravity of his position and instruction.

 

[babochka]

Let me clarify a few things here.

First, this image here:

Antidoron is NOT intended for non-Catholics (or non-Orthodox). Remember that fasting is from midnight and normally after Orthodox/Matins and Divine Liturgy which could be anywhere from 2-3 hours, it would be late morning or almost noon, depending what time the parish starts the services. People are hungry. The practicality of this is that people are given the bread so they can start having something in their stomach as soon as they receive the Eucharist. The practice of how the antidoron is blessed differs also. Some would give it at the end of the Liturgy so it is blessed by touching the bread to the Chalice. Others bring it out during Communion so people can eat and drink right after receiving Communion, I don’t think there is any other additional blessing done besides the prayers during proskomide.

So, in conclusion, don’t mistake the antidoron as something to simulate the Eucharist for the non-members of the Church. It is not the intention of the tradition.

This is an explanation of antidoron that I’ve never heard before.

I’ve always learned that antidoron was traditionally given to those who could not receive the Eucharist for some reason, whether they were not properly disposed or some other reason. It is true that catechumens had traditionally been dismissed during the point at which antidoron was distributed, so it would not have been available to non-Catholics (or Orthodox). I’ve also been told that it was frequently taken home to be given to the sick, or to be consumed throughout the week.

This excerpt from the Orthodox Wiki site seems to confirm my understanding:
Antidoron (from Greek, meaning “instead of the gifts”; in Arabic, qurban) is the remaining bread from a loaf of prosphora after the Lamb has been removed for the Holy Eucharist. In Byzantine practice, it is blessed during the megalynarion to the Theotokos immediately after the epiclesis in the Divine Liturgy and is given by the priest to the faithful after the service. Historically, it was distributed only to those who had not received ‘the Gifts’, Holy Communion so that they would receive a Blessing in place of Holy Communion but this practice has changed over time and all those present at the Divine Liturgy receive Antidoron as a blessing.

Of course, many traditions have evolved in different times and places and different explanations have been given. Your explanation could be equally correct, but given the meaning of the word, mine makes more sense to me.

 

[babochka]

Indeed - of goodwill, and for health and God’s blessings. On the EC side, at least in the Ruthenian Church, blessed bread (phosphora) is only distributed as part of festive annointing (Mirovanije), with such properly blessed at the Litija the evening before (but sometimes right after the Ambon Prayer, if Vespers were not held), and is typically phosphora not used for the Eucharistic celebration. The “distance” from the Eucharist is even greater in this case.

In our Ruthenian parish, blessed bread is distributed after every Divine Liturgy.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

In our Ruthenian parish, blessed bread is distributed after every Divine Liturgy.

Fascinating! I have to make it out West more often. I’ll be a guest @ Holy Angels in San Diego in a few weeks, while in the area for business.

 

[ConstantineTG]

This is an explanation of antidoron that I’ve never heard before.

I’ve always learned that antidoron was traditionally given to those who could not receive the Eucharist for some reason, whether they were not properly disposed or some other reason. It is true that catechumens had traditionally been dismissed during the point at which antidoron was distributed, so it would not have been available to non-Catholics (or Orthodox). I’ve also been told that it was frequently taken home to be given to the sick, or to be consumed throughout the week.

This excerpt from the Orthodox Wiki site seems to confirm my understanding:
Antidoron (from Greek, meaning “instead of the gifts”; in Arabic, qurban) is the remaining bread from a loaf of prosphora after the Lamb has been removed for the Holy Eucharist. In Byzantine practice, it is blessed during the megalynarion to the Theotokos immediately after the epiclesis in the Divine Liturgy and is given by the priest to the faithful after the service. Historically, it was distributed only to those who had not received ‘the Gifts’, Holy Communion so that they would receive a Blessing in place of Holy Communion but this practice has changed over time and all those present at the Divine Liturgy receive Antidoron as a blessing.

Of course, many traditions have evolved in different times and places and different explanations have been given. Your explanation could be equally correct, but given the meaning of the word, mine makes more sense to me.

Many of our traditions have practical purposes when they first started going them, before the more pious explanations we have today for doing something that is no longer practically necessary.

According to some experts (theologians, priests, etc), that frequent reception was the norm in the early days of the Church. So the likelihood that antidoron was instituted to give to those who were not receiving wouldn’t have justified that. Perhaps that understanding evolved as the “piety” for skipping on communion for lack of worthiness developed over time. But definitely the bread we use in our Liturgies started out of a necessity to feed the people or even the monks who would be on all-night prayer vigils or would have been fasting a long time until the time they receive the Eucharist at Divine Liturgy. Who knows, perhaps the Emperor one day observed that there were bread scraps on the Proskomide table and asked the priests if he can have the bread because he is very hungry from fasting. Then eventually it became a norm and the bread is given to everyone. I don’t know if that is how it happened, but usually that is how these practices get inserted into the Liturgy. If people think we have so many Liturgical innovations today, back in the day it was more of the norm to “wing it” rather than have some strict adherence to some document somewhere.

 

[gkoomen]

Why should non-Catholics get the Eucharist? Why should they be in our churches? Why should they get unconsecrated bread and wine? There is no reason for them to get it.

Why should they be in our Churches? indeed! What about conversion? No less a person than Scott Hahn was converted this way - and many others. I’m on that list too! But uncoonsecrated bread and wine would not be nearly as effective (it would just seem patronizing!) as a good, friendly explanation - which is what I got - and here I am!

 

[babochka]

Fascinating! I have to make it out West more often. I’ll be a guest @ Holy Angels in San Diego in a few weeks, while in the area for business.

I’m learning that the way we have always done things in our parish doesn’t necessarily reflect the normal practice in Ruthenian churches in America. For example, we had infant communion when I was a child in the 70s. I always assumed that was the way it was done, but I only recently learned that most Ruthenians in the US did not restore infant Communion until the 90s. I wonder if it was the influence of an early pastor who was more Orthodox leaning?

 

[ConstantineTG]

Why should they be in our Churches? indeed! What about conversion? No less a person than Scott Hahn was converted this way - and many others. I’m on that list too! But uncoonsecrated bread and wine would not be nearly as effective (it would just seem patronizing!) as a good, friendly explanation - which is what I got - and here I am!

The better question is, why would non-Catholics want to receive the Eucharist in the first place?

 

[WingsOfEagles]

The better question is, why would non-Catholics want to receive the Eucharist in the first place?

If they come from a Protestant faith, their own churches hold occasional services where they break bread and drink wine (aka grape juice). They consider it representative, but entering a Catholic Mass, it would appear to them that our celebration of the Eucharist is the same thing, so with the best of intentions, they want to participate in a practice that Jesus spoke of in the Bible. They deny true presence, but would see the ceremony as Biblically ok.

 

[gkoomen]

The better question is, why would non-Catholics want to receive the Eucharist in the first place?

I sure wanted to. I had been Anglican and Presbyterian,. and, as both took Holy Communion very seriously. I believed that Jesus was truly present in the bread and wine; but I did not yet understand trans-substantiation. I had been baptized a Catholic; so the priest eventually did let me receive Holy Communion. I had received it in a very liberal Catholic Church; and had also gone to Confession. I have a friend whom I want to interest in the Church; but she is turned off by the closed Communion - but I don’t think for a moment that it should not be closed. I do think giving her unconsecrated bread would keep her comfortably outside.