Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Eucharist for Non-Catholics
Zenit News Agency ^ | August 17, 2004 | Father Edward McNamara

Posted on 08/18/2004 6:45:01 AM PDT by NYer

ROME, AUG. 17, 2004 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

Q: I have been a Eucharistic minister to the sick for the past 10 years. I have done this in four different dioceses. I have permission from the local bishop to bring daily Communion to a gravely ill relative. This past Sunday, I met several Episcopalians and Lutherans who really wanted to participate in some type of a service too. My heart went out to them. In all our readings Jesus healed based on a person's faith, not their creed. I have not shared Communion, but my heart says this would be good for the faith of those who are suffering. May the Eucharist be shared among non-Catholic if there is faith in the Real Presence? Must I abide by Church law? -- S.C., Little Rock, Arkansas

A: John Paul II has spoken on the relationship between the Eucharist and ecumenism in his encyclical "Ecclesia de Eucharistia":

"The gift of Christ and his Spirit which we receive in Eucharistic communion superabundantly fulfills the yearning for fraternal unity deeply rooted in the human heart; at the same time it elevates the experience of fraternity already present in our common sharing at the same Eucharistic table to a degree which far surpasses that of the simple human experience of sharing a meal. Through her communion with the body of Christ the Church comes to be ever more profoundly 'in Christ in the nature of a sacrament, that is, a sign and instrument of intimate unity with God and of the unity of the whole human race.'

"The seeds of disunity, which daily experience shows to be so deeply rooted in humanity as a result of sin, are countered by the unifying power of the body of Christ. The Eucharist, precisely by building up the Church, creates human community" (No. 24).

Later, in No. 46 of the encyclical, the Pope reminds us of those rare cases, and under what conditions, non-Catholic Christians may be admitted to the sacraments of the Eucharist, reconciliation and anointing of the sick.

This administration is limited 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."

It adds: "These conditions, from which no dispensation can be given, must be carefully respected, even though they deal with specific individual cases. That is because the denial of one or more truths of the faith regarding these sacraments and, among these, the truth regarding the need of the ministerial priesthood for their validity, renders the person asking improperly disposed to legitimately receiving them. And the opposite is also true: Catholics may not receive 'communion' in those communities which lack a valid sacrament of orders."

The Holy Father refers to several numbers of the Ecumenical Directory which specify these conditions in more detail, in its chapter on "Sharing Spiritual Activities and Resources."

The general principles involved in this sharing must reflect this double fact:

"1) The real communion in the life of the Spirit which already exists among Christians and is expressed in their prayer and liturgical worship;

"2) The incomplete character of this communion because of differences of faith and understanding which are incompatible with an unrestricted mutual sharing of spiritual endowments."

For these reasons the Church recognizes that "in certain circumstances, by way of exception, and under certain conditions, access to these sacraments may be permitted, or even commended, for Christians of other Churches and ecclesial Communities" (No. 130).

Apart from the case of danger of death, the episcopal conference and the local bishop may specify other grave circumstances in which a Protestant may receive these sacraments although always respecting the conditions outlined above in the Holy Father's encyclical: "that the person be unable to have recourse for the sacrament desired to a minister of his or her own Church or ecclesial Community, ask for the sacrament of his or her own initiative, [and] manifest Catholic faith in this sacrament and be properly disposed" (No. 131).

Therefore in general it is not possible for you to give Communion to Protestants. But if you find one who fulfills the above conditions, you should advise the local pastor so that the person may receive reconciliation and anointing of the sick.

This does not mean that you are completely despoiled of all possibilities of giving spiritual comfort while exercising one of the corporal works of mercy.

Apart from words of encouragement and consolation you could also use some of the spiritual treasury of readings, prayers and intercessions found in the ritual for the care of the sick. Thus you could pray for, and with, these souls in a time of need.


TOPICS: Activism; Apologetics; Catholic; Current Events; Ecumenism; General Discusssion; History; Mainline Protestant; Ministry/Outreach; Prayer; Religion & Culture; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-210 next last
To: lugsoul
That is a remarkably egocentric view,

Why? I'm 99.9% sure that the Republicans get it right which is why I'm not a Democrat. And I wasn't offended that the Democrats didn't invite me to be a part of their nomination process although I happen to live in the area. ;-)

Listen, I gotta run for the day, be back later (I don't want you to think I'm ignoring you).

61 posted on 08/18/2004 11:47:40 AM PDT by american colleen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
"Could you cite which early Christian writers did not believe that the consecrated Eucharist is the Lord?"

Can you set aside your dogmatic view long enough to recognize that I didn't say that?

Could you explain why God would give us flesh and blood and mask its true reality behind the taste and smell of bread and wine?

62 posted on 08/18/2004 11:49:20 AM PDT by lugsoul (Until at last I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: american colleen

That you compare receiving a sacrament to a political circus is telling.


63 posted on 08/18/2004 11:50:45 AM PDT by lugsoul (Until at last I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul; american colleen
Consubstution is not the official Lutheran definition of what happens to the bread and wine at communion, neither is transubstution.

Orthodox Lutherans believe that during the consecration, the bread and the wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus, even though the appearance and properties of the bread and wine are still there. How this happens is not precisely defined.

Consubstution (Body and Blood in and bread and wine) is of Anglican theology. Lutherans often are labeled as holding to consubstution, when in actuality they are closer to the Eastern Orthodox view of communion.

As for communing in a Roman Catholic church, in short no. Taking communion shows that you agree with the theology and discipline of the church offering communion. To do that regularly at a church where you are not a member would be misleading. I know that the ELCA practice open communion, but that is something that is on pretty shaky ground theologically.

How ever, in extreme situations, ie near death or facing good possibility of death, it is allowed.
64 posted on 08/18/2004 12:34:31 PM PDT by redgolum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: redgolum
"Taking communion shows that you agree with the theology and discipline of the church offering communion."

This perception is, I believe, the problem. I have never seen anything in the Scriptures indicating that participation in communion or any other sacrament requires doctrinal unity. Taking communion shows that I am accepting the teaching and the love of Jesus Christ, not the teaching of the RCC or any other Church. The very idea that the venue of my taking communion can change a holy sacrament to a mortal sin is, in a word, absurd.

65 posted on 08/18/2004 12:45:12 PM PDT by lugsoul (Until at last I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: american colleen

I will keep my answer short and preface it with advising everyone I am just as confused on some of the minutiae of our rules. But, if I had to say why it's different for a dying person vs. a regular person, even with all else being equal, is that a dying person will not get another chance to receive the Eucharist.


66 posted on 08/18/2004 1:01:39 PM PDT by Conservative til I die
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Here's my take on it, special exceptions and emergencies aside.

Dear Protestants and other non-Catholics:

STAY OUT OF OUR COMMUNION LINES WHEN YOU'RE IN OUR CHURCHES!
67 posted on 08/18/2004 1:05:21 PM PDT by Conservative til I die
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tjwmason; sandyeggo
As has been previously reported numerous times, while attending Mass at the Vatican with his family, Blair received a blessing from the Pope, not Communion. Basil Cardinal Hume notified Blair by letter in 1996 that he could not receive Communion at a Catholic Mass, which he apparently had been doing.
68 posted on 08/18/2004 1:11:14 PM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
Have your mother-in-law, the apostate "monsignor" and those apostate "priests" read the following: http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,2763,939223,00.html
69 posted on 08/18/2004 1:14:00 PM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lupie
The nun is mistaken, the mother-in-law is not.

I'm sure that you'll find your particular judgment "amusing" as well.

70 posted on 08/18/2004 1:29:26 PM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul

You must find much of Scripture offensive. The Roman Catholic Church is not a cafeteria.


71 posted on 08/18/2004 1:32:24 PM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul; american colleen
Could you explain why God would give us flesh and blood and mask its true reality behind the taste and smell of bread and wine?

Can you explain why God created other solar systems in the universe? Who can understand the mind of God?

72 posted on 08/18/2004 1:32:46 PM PDT by NYer (When you have done something good, remember the words "without Me you can do nothing." (John 15:5).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
No, but I find the statement that the views of non-Catholic Christians are non-scriptural to be profoundly offensive.

The Roman Catholic Church did not write the Scriptures, no matter how much they like to teach you that they did.

73 posted on 08/18/2004 1:34:54 PM PDT by lugsoul (Until at last I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: NYer

No, I can't. But I'm not the one contending that He is giving us something that he is purposefully disguising. Or that one is lost if they don't believe that.


74 posted on 08/18/2004 1:36:20 PM PDT by lugsoul (Until at last I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
"The Roman Catholic Church is not a cafeteria."

The Roman Catholic Church is not the sole repository of Christianity.

75 posted on 08/18/2004 1:37:32 PM PDT by lugsoul (Until at last I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
Could you explain why God would give us flesh and blood and mask its true reality behind the taste and smell of bread and wine?

Could you explain why Christ did the exact same thing at the Last Supper?

76 posted on 08/18/2004 1:38:22 PM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul

Basically you endorse indifferentism? A type of moral relativism.


77 posted on 08/18/2004 1:55:26 PM PDT by johnb2004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul

"I believe the Bible is the Truth."

That is nice, but it is no proof. You accuse others of being egocentric, but it is you who is egocentric. Catholics look to the Church for authority. You look to yourself.


78 posted on 08/18/2004 1:59:51 PM PDT by johnb2004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
OK, but it seems to me you are being disrespectful to a religion that you don't espouse.

I am sorry you feel that way. I do not necessarily respect nor disrespect a particular "religion" if I take communion in any church, RC or not. I can not think of anywhere in Scripture where it says we are to "respect" other's people religions. Do you know of any? Nor does it say it is wrong to be disrespectful of them. In fact, I would think it is right in His eyes if I were to go into a Mormon church or a buddist temple or Islamic mosque and be "respectful" of their religion.

My faith is in the Lord Jesus Christ. I hope that yours is also. It would seem as if you are trying to judge my motives. You don't know my heart, nor do I know yours, but we can be confident that He knows our hearts and if we are abiding in Him, then if we are sinning against him, we can know they He will expose the wrong motives of our hearts. We can't.

I won't get into the theological discussions

I won't either. (Biblical - perhaps, if people are willing to do so under Him.) They have been done ad nauseum over many centuries.

I didn't belong and I disagreed with their beliefs and I knew they ask that I don't partake in something crucial and sacred for them, then, out of respect, I would remain silent and still.

That is you. But we must all go as the Lord leads. And, you also do not know of all the circumstances.

I'm sure no one 'freak's out' when you say "thank you", but I am sure they are taken aback somewhat.

"Freak out" was probably the wrong term to use. But there was a look of almost panic on the face - it had a very definite element of fear. I know the person. And yes, I know enough of what you are "supposed" to say and how you are to hold your hands, and all of that. I just choose not to do or say that because I don't believe it has anything to do with my walk with the Lord and you are right - I can't be a hypocrite. I don't say it because I do not believe that saying a particular word or phrase means anything. God looks at the heart. He always has, He always will.

79 posted on 08/18/2004 2:00:32 PM PDT by lupie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

Which part of his body was the bread he broke at the Last Supper?


80 posted on 08/18/2004 2:00:41 PM PDT by lugsoul (Until at last I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-210 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson