I recently attended my Lutheran Church with my in-laws, who belong to a Roman Catholic Church. They did not want to take communion, stating that they thought it would be inappropriate. The Lutheran Church basically requires a belief in Jesus to receive communion, so they were definitely welcome to participate.
Is there anything in Roman Catholocism that would prevent one from having communion at a non-Catholic church, or was it just a personal decision on their part?
BTW, I was not put-off by their decision, I just want to know if there is a doctinal reason to go along with their feelings.
There is a very good reason that they declined communion.
Catholics believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of the reality of the oneness of faith, life, and worship. We do not regard the bread and wine of communion as merely a symbol: we hold that, when the Mass is celebrated by a priest, the bread and wine change character and become the true body and blood of Christ.
When we receive communion during Mass, we do so knowing that this unique transsubstantiation binds us as Catholics together. We do not accept communion in other churches because those churches do not share the precise meaning we ascribe to what communion actually is.
I can see why other religions would not wish to partake in Catholic communion, then, out of a respect for this belief which they do not share.
But if a Catholic partook (is that a word?) in another religion’s symbolic communion, knowing it was only that, would that really be disrespecting the other religion?
Or would it violate the rules of Catholicism, somehow, even though it is acknowledged merely symbolic and not claiming to be the genuine body of Christ?
I’m just genuinely curious for a little more info, Bricker, thanks.
It doesn’t matter whether the non-Catholic has respect for the Catholic belief or not; the Roman church refuses to allow anyone who has not been baptized in their Church to receive their communion.
I’m Catholic and I would in all likelihood refrain from receiving at a non-Catholic, non-Orthodox church. The belief there isn’t the same and I would feel compromised by the difference. In places where the bread and wine are passed as just a symbol of community (sorry I don’t know well enough what various demoninations believe; this is something I would clarify before attending) it just wouldn’t have the meaning our sacrament does.
Yes, you have to be a baptized Catholic, and you also have to be free from serious sin or anything that would be an impediment to reciving the Eucharist fully. Certainly for the most part this is up to your own judgment; I’ve never seen a priest refuse to give Communion but I wouldn’t fault him for it if he did. Fairly.
It is lawful for the Catholic faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister, to receive the sacrament of communion from non-Catholic ministers, but only those in whose churches these sacraments are valid.
Those churches are the Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, the Polish National Catholic Church… and maybe some others that I’m missing. But apart from that, no, a Catholic may not receive communion in another church.
I wouldn’t take communion in another non-Catholic Christian church (it would be different in an emergency for the Orthodox churches where the orders are valid). As others have stated, the Catholic view of communion (transubstantiation etc) is very different from the beliefs of other Christian churches. It would compromise my beliefs to receive communion at an Anglican or Lutheran service. It would also be a pretence of ignoring the significant doctrinal differences that exist between the churches.
Not just baptized, you have to have gone through the rites of first communion, I believe. Well, unless you converted as an adult. But children don’t take their first communion until age 7.
I’ll sing the songs as a show of community, but I wouldn’t receive communion. Communion isn’t an expression of community for me, it’s receiving the Body ond Blood of Christ.
Is it? I don’t think transubstantiation is the basis for the rule anyway, though, as to my knowledge Eastern Orthodox churches don’t share that belief (the exact nature of the Eucharist is a holy mystery in the Eastern Orthodox Church. I could be wrong about that, though.)
Bricker, when you talk about churches you can take Communion in under emergency circumstances, does that include all of the churches in the Historic Episcopate? Because I think some Lutheran sects actually maintain it, although I can’t remember which ones.
Bricker’s position is accurate on one level, but it is expressed in the legal terminology that makes it seem extreme. There are several Christian groups that believe in the genuine Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, (including several of the Lutheran or Evangelische groups). The official Catholic position is that various branchings in theological explanations (Lutherans) or in the rites used to bestow Apostolic succession (Anglicans) render the beliefs of those groups invalid. (This position does nothing to endear the RCC to the other groups, of course.)
However, even with an acknowledgement that other groups recognize the Divine Presence in the Eucharist, the Catholic church does take it one step further in noting that communion implies unity (as noted earlier) and we are clearly not united with the other groups.
Even if you convert as an adult, you go through a first communion of sorts. When I converted, we had sort of a three in one. Baptism for those not yet baptised, first communion and confirmation all in one.
I grew up Roman Catholic, switching churches after my divorce and remarriage. I would never presume to ask for the Eucharist in a Roman Catholic church anymore, just as I never took comunion in a Protestant church during my days in the RC.
And it’s not just Catholics that can be persnickity. My wife grew up in a Missouri Synod Lutheran church where, unless you were a bona fide member of that congregation, you had to ask the minister’s permission to receive communion. And the ministers were known to refuse non-Lutherans.
I’ll grant you that my church (Christian, non-denominational) doesn’t believe in the actual presence of Christ’s body & blood in the elements, but it’s a mistake to portray our communion as just “an expression of community.” We hold that communion is partaking of Christ’s body & blood symbolically, and do it per Paul’s instruction to the Corinthian Christians in First Corinthians 11:23-26 specifically: “For I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which he was betrayed took bread; and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, This is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup, after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord’s death till he come.”
And the first century Romans already tried that “cannibal” thing, Clothahump.
Yeah, that’s what I meant-when my cousin’s wife converted, she just did all three at the same time.
Whereas if you’re born Catholic, you have to wait until you’re seven years old. And it’s a Very Big Deal. For us little Catholic girls, your Communion Dress is second only to your Wedding Dress.
Since I’m lapsed, on the rare occassion I go to church (usually on holidays to please my dad, and even then it’s rare), I’ll usually sit out Communion.
