Posted on 04/23/2018 7:28:38 AM PDT by Salvation
credit: J. Lippelmann, Catholic Standard
Last week in the Office of Readings of the Liturgy of the Hours we read from St. Justin Martyr who said:
No one may share the Eucharist with us unless he believes what we teach is true; Unless he is washed in the regenerating waters of baptism for the remission of his sins, and unless he lives in accordance with the principles given us by Christ (Apologia Cap 66: 6, 427-431)
St Justin may also have in mind a text from the Letter to the Hebrews which links proper doctrine to the reception of Holy Communion:
Brethren, Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings, for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace and not by their ceremonial foods, which are of no value to those devoted to them. For we have an altar from which those who serve at the [old] tabernacle have no right to eat. (Heb 13:9-10)
Thus Communion points to doctrine, not merely to hospitality. The Eucharist comes from a basic communion of belief and serves to strengthen that belief. It is no mere ceremony, it is, as we shall see, a family commnuion rooted in a common belief that makes us brothers and sisters in the Lord and in communion with who He is and what He teaches.
In the modern debate about who can and should receive Holy Communion there is generally the presumption that everyone has a right to approach the Eucharistic Sacrifice and partake of the Body and Blood of the Lord. Thus, to limit or discourage indiscriminate reception of Communion is not only dismissed as unjust, but also, contrary to the practice of Jesus Christ who “welcomed everyone,” even the worst of sinners.
In this sort of climate, it is necessary to explain the Church’s historical practice of what some call “closed communion.” Not everyone who uses this terminology means it pejoratively, though some do. But to some extent, it is fair to say, that we do have “closed communion.” For the Catholic Church, Holy Communion is not a “come one, come all” event. It is reserved for those who, by grace, preserve union with the Church through adherence to all the Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God. Our response of “Amen” at Holy Communion signifies our communion with these realities along with our faith in the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
But many today have reduced Holy Communion to a mere sign of hospitality, such that if the Church does not extend Holy Communion to all, we are considered unkind. There is often a mistaken notion about the nature of the Last Supper (and the Eucharist that proceeds from it) that lurks behind this misconception. Many years ago, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger articulated the misunderstanding well. I summarize the description here from his Collected Works, Vol 11, Ignatius Press pp 273-274:
Nowadays [some] New Testament scholars … say that the Eucharist … is the continuation of the meals with sinners that Jesus had held … a notion with far-reaching consequences. It would mean that the Eucharist is the sinners’ banquet, where Jesus sits at the table; [that] the Eucharist is the public gesture by which we invite everyone without exception. The logic of this is expressed in a far-reaching criticism of the Church’s Eucharist, since it implies that the Eucharist cannot be conditional on anything, not depending on denomination or even on baptism. It is necessarily an open table to which all may come to encounter the universal God …
However, tempting the idea may be, it contradicts what we find in the Bible. Jesus’ Last Supper was not one of those meals he held with “publicans and sinners”. He made it subject to the basic form of the Passover, which implies that the meal was held in a family setting. Thus, he kept it with his new family, with the Twelve; with those whose feet he washed, whom he had prepared by his Word and by this cleansing of absolution (John 13:10) to receive a blood relationship with him, to become one body with him.
The Eucharist is not itself the sacrament of reconciliation, but in fact it presupposes that sacrament. It is the sacrament of the reconciled, to which the Lord invites all those who have become one with him; who certainly still remain weak sinners, but yet have given their hand to him and have become part of his family.
That is why, from the beginning, the Eucharist has been preceded by a discernment … (I Corinthians 11:27ff). The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles [the Didache] is one of the oldest writings outside the New Testament, from the beginning of the Second Century, it takes up this apostolic tradition and has the priest, just before distributing the sacrament saying: “Whoever is holy, let him approach, whoever is not, let him do penance” (Didache 10).
Thanks to Pope Benedict’s writing prior to his papacy, we can see the root of the problem: the failure to see the Eucharist for what it truly is—a sacred banquet wherein those who enjoy communion with the Lord (by His grace) partake of the sign and sacrament of that communion. Holy Communion serves to celebrate and deepen the communion already operative through the other sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, and Confession.
If you want to call this communion “closed,” fine, but at its heart it is more positively called a “sacrum convivium,” a sacred meal of those who share a life together (con = with or together + vivium = life). This is not a “come one, come all” meal; it is a Holy Banquet for those who wear the wedding garment. The garment is righteousness and those who refuse to wear it are cast out (cf: Matt 22:11-12 & Rev 19:8).
Many moderns surely would prefer a “no questions asked” invitation to all who wish to come. We moderns love this notion of inclusiveness and unity. But to a large degree it is a contrived unity that overlooks truth (the opposite of which is falsehood, not just a different viewpoint). Yes, it overlooks the truth necessary for honest, real, and substantive unity. Such a notion of communion is shallow at best and a lie at worst. How can people approach the Eucharist, the sacrament of Holy Communion and unity, and say “Amen” when they differ with the Church over essentials such as that Baptism is necessary; that there are seven Sacraments; that the Pope is the successor of Peter and the Vicar of Christ on Earth; that homosexual acts, fornication, and adultery are gravely sinful; that women cannot be admitted to Holy Orders; that there is in fact a priesthood; that Scripture must be read in the light of the Magisterium; and on and on? Saying that there is communion in such a case is either a contrivance or a lie, but in either case, it does not suffice for the “Amen” that is required at the moment of reception of Holy Communion.
Such divisions do not make for a family meal or a “sacrum convivium.” Hence, to share Holy Communion with Protestants, dissenters, and others who do not live in communion with the Church is incoherent. To paraphrase Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict), the Eucharist is not a table fellowship with publicans and other “sinners”; it is a family meal that presupposes grace and shared faith.
Tomorrow we can look to the need to receive Holy Communion, free of grave or serious sin.
Monsignor Pope Ping!
“But many today have reduced Holy Communion to a mere sign of hospitality”
I discussed this topic with the Priest several weeks ago. Jesus did not turn away the unclean, but welcomed them to redemption and union. He ate with the sinners as they needed Him.
True Communion involves the Holy Spirit moving in. If an unclean person asks for the Holy Spirit, they may get more than they bargain for as the process of the Holy Spirit removing the sin is mighty uncomfortable. When this happened to me my body shook like a dog who just climbed from the pond. There is good reason as to why the Quakers and Shakers earned their names. It’s reality. For someone unclean to receive Holy Communion, it is an uncomfortable cleansing process. But then again, we are now in the “Tide Pod” generation of cleansing within!!!
Jesus stated, “I have not come to judge, but to save.” Are we better than Jesus to judge people as worthy or unworthy?
Just as the worst sin is to blasphemy and reject the Holy Spirit, who are we to block someone as being undeserving of it. The words that keep ringing in my ears are, “As we judge others, we too are judged.”
Excellent thought provoking article. Thank you for sharing it.
“it is a family meal that presupposes grace and shared faith”
We as brothers may argue and spat, but we all have the same Father and the same Savior. We should welcome our brothers and presuppose grace as we are of one family, God’s.
All are welcome to attend Mass. Holy Communion, however, is closed. Sorry, but that’s reality.
Anybody remember that one?
the Bishop in the "Rainbow Sash" incident was right. The priest in the DC incident was right, and the Archbishop was wrong.
If these individuals want to go to Confession, repent their sins, and then come and receive Our Lord, fine. But if they want to treat the Holy Eucharist as a political token, a publicity hook or a fast-food snack: no.
Same for the Mafia, an abortion-promoting Senator, or any other proud, strutting public evildoer.
Begone, ye workers of iniquity.
Such divisions do not make for a family meal or a “sacrum convivium.” Hence, to share Holy Communion with Protestants, dissenters, and others who do not live in communion with the Church is incoherent. To paraphrase Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict), the Eucharist is not a table fellowship with publicans and other “sinners”; it is a family meal that presupposes grace and shared faith.
It is not communion with the Church, (and by this they mean Roman Catholic) that is the issue. The issue is if the person is a follower of Christ.
If the person professes faith in Christ, and only Christ, they are able to participate in communion.
Baptized at Holy Spirit in Columbus, Ohio. Confirmed in Pittsburgh twelve years later.
I’ll start getting worked-up about this when the Church stops serving the Eucharist to Democrat politicians who never met an abortion they wouldn’t vote for.
The article outlines how to worthily receive Holy Communion.
We should all understand what is involved.
In practice, each person determines whether they are worthy, except in unusual situations where the priest or Bishop may decide not give someone Communion.
That is why it is important accept Christ first as personal Lord and Savior.
pelosi, kerry, kennedy supporters of baby killing all receive communion. I don’t know the names of all the others.
The sad reality is that we have a Pope who is not as strict as the one before him inregards to holy communion.
Correction: in regards.
I look at it and see a clarion call to repentance.
Which communion are you talking about? In your denomination? Which is?
From the article:
“...to share Holy Communion with Protestants, dissenters, and others who do not live in communion with the Church is incoherent. To paraphrase Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict), the Eucharist is not a table fellowship with publicans and other “sinners”; it is a family meal that presupposes grace and shared faith.”
Please do make a thread a Catholic Caucus when in the body of the article it denigrates other belief systems.
Thee caucus designation has been removed.
Read articles carefully when posting.
I have rarely heard of it being enforced, though. I think Bp Bruskewitz and maybe Cordileone have told some people to stay away until they repent.
It really stinks to have good doctrine and zero discipline.
However, the disobedience of most, even at the top, would not justify our dereliction from the Church. I know I must live as a good Catholic for my soul's salvation. And I must pray for the healing of the Church.
The severed hand cannot heal the Body.
Sorry I missed that. I read the sentence about publicans and sinners, but missed the preceding sentence.
Thank you.
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.