They’re better tasting if dipped in the blood of Christ.
I’ve never seen anyone get in communion line only to not receive it, other than those two young to receive it. And I’ve never seen it passed around like appetizers- because you are supposed to receive the host, not take it.
I’m not sure about the rules for which other faiths may receive a Catholic communion, I am quite certain that Eastern Orthodox may receive, there may be others.
Depends on the denomination and the practice within the local parish.
Eastern Orthodox (and, I think, Eastern Rite Catholics) normally receive communion by spoon – the bread is immersed in the wine, and a small spoon of bread dipped in wine is administered to each communicant.
Episcopalians/Anglicans and Roman Rite Catholics receive communion either standing or kneeling. The far more common practice is to hold out one’s hands, together, palms up and more-or-less cupped, left hand supporting right hand. In some more traditional Catholic parishes and a few conservative High Church Anglican parishes, one kneels with mouth open, tongue slightly forward over teeth but not “stuck out” like a sassy child, and the priest places the host on one’s tongue.
Kneeling with arms crossed is an indication that one does not wish to receive communion, for whatever reason, but wishes to obtain the Church’s blessing from the priest. Normally he will lay hands on your head and say a blessing, quite often the Aaronic Blessing (Numbers 6:24-26); some priests will use the Eucharistic Bread to bless you, with the formula “The Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ keep you unto everlasting life” (or similar phrasing), making the Sign of the Cross over you with a consecrated Host.
The Canon Law cite above may not be completely clear. For added emphasis, I should point out that the practice you described is specifically prohibited by Instruction 160 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal:
In the dioceses of the United States, the norm for reception of Holy Communion is standing. The Missal cautions that communicants should not be denied Holy Communion because they kneel, but, rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm.
And, lest there be any misunderstanding, an “extraordinary minister of communion” is actually fairly common, despite the name. Any member of the community who has been confirmed (roughly analogous to Bar Mitzvah) can become an extraordinary minister of communion. You just need to attend a brief (an hour or two) class by the priest on the proper procedures, and be approved by the priest (I’ve never heard of this not happening, though I’m sure it can), and then you can distribute the communion. I’d estimate there are about 100-150 lay Eucharistic ministers at my church; a staff member prepares a schedule for them to serve in rotation.
But it would be unheard-of for everyone in the congregation to be a Eucharistic minister, much less all the attendees at a funeral, and even if they were, I think the proper procedure would still be to have a few specific ones tasked with distributing to the rest. So I can’t really say what was going on at the funeral Brian attended.
Lighting candles, on the other hand, is a much less serious thing. Unlike the Eucharist, the candles are not sacramental, and so far as I know, serve merely as a symbol of prayers for another. I’m pretty sure that there would be no offense at all for a Jew to light candles for that purpose (though there’s often a donation box you’re expected to contribute to when lighting one), and lighting a few in ignorance would be at worst a minor faux pas.
With regard to the question of taking communion while in a state of sin: Anglican orders of service, at least, include Prayers of Penitence and a general confession, which, presumably, covers that particular requirement. (I suppose, technically, you could participate in the general confession, receive absolution, and then commit a sin while standing in line for communion, but you’d have to be pretty quick about it.)
I’ve been at big services with multiple officiating priests, but I’ve never seen baskets of Communion wafers being passed around. (Are you sure they’d been consecrated? Prior to the actual act of consecration, after all, they’re no more sacred than your ordinary Ritz cracker … )
Here in Brookfield CT, we have a few churches in close proximity, 2 Protestant and one Catholic.
I was at Mass a few months ago, and saw my neighbor, the Reverend of one of the local Protestant churches, just a couple of pews away. Later, I was astounded that he went to the altar and received Communion - from our Pastor who knew him very well.
Our Pastor leans solidly toward Ecumenism, and I was happy he gave the Rev Communion.
Later I learned that the Rev had retired just recently and was avoiding going to his old church, so that his successor wouldn’t feel the pressure of his presence, during a service. In other words, he wanted to let the new guy get comfortable. Which I thought was very nice.
This was my first reaction…maybe they weren’t consecrated? But I spent some time on the Liturgy Committee at my parish, and after reading up on the various things that are going on with the Mass these days, I am afraid that this may very well be someone’s idea of a warm, fuzzy distribution of communion. Yikes.
I’ve taken Communion twice, basically out of curiosity, for the hell of it, and for the solidarity of participating in the moment and the sake of ritual.
I’m not religious in anyway, and was not raised to be. I have never been baptized, and I certainly don’t accept Christ as the “Savior and Son of God”.
The first time was when I was a child and my Grandmother and I had attended the funeral of a friend of her’s. I asked if it was OK if I went up and took Communion with everyone else and she said yes. I was curious and didn’t know any better.
The second time was at “Senior Mass” when I was graduating High School. The priest who peformed the service was a very nice guy who happened to have befriended my Mother. My mother and I felt that it was a very nice gesture to open their church to the whole class, wanting to wish us well on the rest of our life journeys, etc. We also knew that barely anyone would show up, so I went just to show that it was appreciated. It was the same motivation I had for again taking Communion.
It wasn’t untill meeting Mrs. WeHaveCookies (a recovering North Dakotan German Catholic) that I learned just how much of a transgression my actions would have been perceived as by the RCC, had my true heathen status been known.
Years after she had withdrawn herself from Catholicism, Mrs. WeHaveCookies decided to take (and was freely given) Communion at her Father’s funeral by her family’s priest, who was well aware of her spiritual perspective and lesbian lifestyle and who had shook my hand in her Father’s hospital room after reading his Last Rites a few days previously.
In the flip side of my previous motivations, I knew that most of the many hundreds of people gathered in the church for the funeral (and especially Mrs. WeHaveCookies’ family, who had gracefully handled her Mother’s “outing” of us both to them all at the hospital in order to insure that she would be comfortable leaning on me for support in her grief instead of worrying about what Aunt Maurene would be thinking) knew full well that I was not Catholic, so I kept my seat with the handfull of other folks who did not line up for Communion.
I do not feel bad or guilty about taking it when I have, though. I had my reasons for wanting to take it and they had their reasons for wanting to give it to me. Does it really matter that those reasons were not the same? It strikes me as more of a win-win than a disdain-worthy transgression.
Just to pick up on this and throw in the vocabulary, for anyone who may want it.
Classic basilica structure, the way most traditional churches and cathedrals were built – the long, relatively narrow building – has a bunch of customary terms.
The altar proper is the (usually ornate) table on which the offerings of money and of bread and wine are given to God’s use – the latter being consecrated for communion. The term is sometimes extended to a raised area, with two or three steps, on which the altar proper sits. The area at one end (traditionally the east) of the church where this is historically located, generally shut off from the rest of the church by a low altar rail, is the chancel. Also customarily located in the chancel is a side table where the bread and wine, and other materials needed for the service, are placed prior to being needed at the altar; this is the credence table. If the altar is against the east wall, it may be surmounted by a decorative reredos running up the wall behind it. There may be a carved or cloth frontal descending from the side of the altar facing the congregation. If the altar is freestanding with a rounded area behind it, the latter is the apse.
The area where the congregation sits is the nave. Some churches are constructed with a cross shape, and if this is the case, the two short arms of the cross are the transepts; the area where they come together is the crossing, and modern liturgical preference has moved a freestanding altar to the crossing, to facilitate celebration “in the midst of the people.” The side passages allowing access to the pews or other seating are aisles – properly the central passage used by processions is not properly called an aisle, which derives from ala, wing, but is nearly always so termed anyway. At the opposite end of the building from the chancel is a separated-off area through which the congregation enters before the service and where any procession will form up; this is the narthex, sometimes called the vestibule.