Giving Communion to non-Catholics

[Pennypacker11]

When is it allowable for non-Catholics to receive communion in the Catholic Church. I didn't really think that it was permitted (except maybe the Eastern Orthodox?). However, I was reading about Bro. Roger Shultz (the head of the Taize community in France who was killed during evening prayer this week). he clearly was not Catholic.

[url="http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0504672.htm"]Catholicnews.com[/url]:
"Roger Schutz was born May 12, 1915, the son of a Swiss Calvinist pastor and a French Protestant mother, in Provence, a small town in Switzerland. He was a minister of the Swiss Reformed Church."

However, he received communion from then Cardinal Ratzinger:

[url="http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=4645"]Catholic News Agency[/url]
"While Br. Roger was not himself Catholic, he was closely associated to the Catholic Church. He and his community were highly esteemed by Pope John Paul II. The two were longtime friends, and Br. Roger received Communion from then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger at John Paul’s funeral."

What are the guidelines for non-Catholics receiving communion?

[avemaria40]

Idk, did he ever convert? NonCatholics (except Eastern Orthodox, Polish National Catholics, etc) are not allowed to receive Holy Communion at a Catholic Church. However, u can receive a blessing from the priest, depending on the church

[Cam42]

[quote name='USCCB']We welcome our fellow Christians to this celebration of the Eucharist as our brothers and sisters. We pray that our common baptism and the action of the Holy Spirit in this Eucharist will draw us closer to one another and begin to dispel the sad divisions which separate us. We pray that these will lessen and finally disappear, in keeping with Christ’s prayer for us “that they may all be one” (Jn 17:21).

Because Catholics believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of the reality of the oneness of faith, life, and worship, members of those churches with whom we are not yet fully united are ordinarily not admitted to Holy Communion. Eucharistic sharing in exceptional circumstances by other Christians requires permission according to the directives of the diocesan bishop and the provisions of canon law (canon 844 § 4). Members of the Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church are urged to respect the discipline of their own Churches. According to Roman Catholic discipline, the Code of Canon Law does not object to the reception of communion by Christians of these Churches (canon 844 § 3).[/quote]

[quote name='Can. 844 §1-5']§1 Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments only to catholic members of Christ's faithful, who equally may lawfully receive them only from catholic ministers, except as provided in §2, 3 and 4 of this canon and in can. 861 §2.


§2 Whenever necessity requires or a genuine spiritual advantage commends it, and provided the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, Christ's faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a catholic minister, may lawfully receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.


§3 Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick to members of the eastern Churches not in full communion with the catholic Church, if they spontaneously ask for them and are properly disposed. The same applies to members of other Churches which the Apostolic See judges to be in the same position as the aforesaid eastern Churches so far as the sacraments are concerned.


[b]§4 If there is a danger of death or if, in the judgment of the diocesan Bishop or of the Episcopal Conference, there is some other grave and pressing need, catholic ministers may lawfully administer these same sacraments to other Christians not in full communion with the catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who spontaneously ask for them, provided that they demonstrate the catholic faith in respect of these sacraments and are properly disposed.[/b]


§5 In respect of the cases dealt with in §2, 3 and 4, the diocesan Bishop or the Episcopal Conference is not to issue general norms except after consultation with the competent authority, at least at the local level, of the non-Catholic Church or community concerned.[/quote]

[journeyman]

Cam, did you intentionally bold Section 4 . . . and if so, why? I can see then Cardinal Ratzinger being "competent authority" but how can attending JPII's funeral consitute "who cannot approach a minister of their own community" . . . I suspect that Br Roger respected the sacrament and was properly disposed, but where's the grave and pressing need?

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

how about never its a mortal sin IN ALL CASES

Can. 731. § 1. Cum omnia Sacramenta Novae Legis, a Christo Domino nostro instituta, sint praecipua sanctificationis et salutis media, summa in iis opportune riteque administrandis ac suscipiendis diligentia et reverentia adhibenda est.

§ 2. Vetitum est Sacramenta Ecclesiae ministrare haereticis aut schismaticis, etiam bona fide errantibus eaque petentibus, nisi prius, erroribus reiectis, Ecclesiae reconciliati fuerint.

Edited August 21, 2005 by Extra ecclesiam nulla salus

[MC Just]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Aug 20 2005, 10:36 PM']how about never its a mortal sin IN ALL CASES

Can. 731. § 1. Cum omnia Sacramenta Novae Legis, a Christo Domino nostro instituta, sint praecipua sanctificationis et salutis media, summa in iis opportune riteque administrandis ac suscipiendis diligentia et reverentia adhibenda est.

§ 2. Vetitum est Sacramenta Ecclesiae ministrare haereticis aut schismaticis, etiam bona fide errantibus eaque petentibus, nisi prius, erroribus reiectis, Ecclesiae reconciliati fuerint.
[right][snapback]692675[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Amen.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Aug 20 2005, 11:36 PM']how about never its a mortal sin IN ALL CASES

Can. 731. § 1. Cum omnia Sacramenta Novae Legis, a Christo Domino nostro instituta, sint praecipua sanctificationis et salutis media, summa in iis opportune riteque administrandis ac suscipiendis diligentia et reverentia adhibenda est.

§ 2. Vetitum est Sacramenta Ecclesiae ministrare haereticis aut schismaticis, etiam bona fide errantibus eaque petentibus, nisi prius, erroribus reiectis, Ecclesiae reconciliati fuerint.
[right][snapback]692675[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Is that from the 1917 CIC? If so, it is abbrogated. It holds no weight any longer, in light of the 1983 CIC. And I didn't know you studied Canon Law.

[quote name='Can. 6']§1 When this Code comes into force, the following are abrogated:

1ƒ the Code of Canon Law promulgated in 1917;

2ƒ other laws, whether universal or particular, which are contrary to the provisions of this Code, unless it is otherwise expressly provided in respect of particular laws;

3ƒ all penal laws enacted by the Apostolic See, whether universal or particular, unless they are resumed in this Code itself;

4ƒ any other universal disciplinary laws concerning matters which are integrally reordered by this Code.

§2 To the extent that the canons of this Code reproduce the former law, they are to be assessed in the light also of canonical tradition.[/quote]

[Cam42]

[quote name='journeyman' date='Aug 20 2005, 11:28 PM']Cam, did you intentionally bold Section 4 . . . and if so, why?  I can see then Cardinal Ratzinger being "competent authority" but how can attending JPII's funeral consitute "who cannot approach a minister of their own community" . . . I suspect that Br Roger respected the sacrament and was properly disposed, but where's the grave and pressing need?
[right][snapback]692657[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

It is the sole judgment of the compitent authority. If then Cardinal Ratzinger chose to give Holy Communion to a non-Catholic, then the conditions must have been met.

[CatholicCid]

Published by:
Guy E. McCombs
Paris, TN, USA

19/08/2005
05:25 PM EST
Around 1969, through a long process of Roman Catholic common law, not only were Roman Catholics permitted to join the ecumenical Community of Taize while remaining in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church; but, the Eucharist was permitted to be both celebrated at the Church of Reconciliation and anywhere that the Brothers of Taize were in the world and the non-Roman Catholic brothers are permitted to receive the Eucharist as they live in anticipation of communion with Peter, Bishop of Rome.

Edited August 21, 2005 by CatholicCid

[IcePrincessKRS]

I like Cam. He's always got the answers for everything. lol

[jasJis]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Aug 20 2005, 10:36 PM']how about never its a mortal sin IN ALL CASES

Can. 731. § 1. Cum omnia Sacramenta Novae Legis, a Christo Domino nostro instituta, sint praecipua sanctificationis et salutis media, summa in iis opportune riteque administrandis ac suscipiendis diligentia et reverentia adhibenda est.

§ 2. Vetitum est Sacramenta Ecclesiae ministrare haereticis aut schismaticis, etiam bona fide errantibus eaque petentibus, nisi prius, erroribus reiectis, Ecclesiae reconciliati fuerint.
[right][snapback]692675[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]So you are saying that Cardinal Ratzinger (now our Pope) committed a mortal sin?

[Cam42]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' date='Aug 21 2005, 02:11 PM']I like Cam. He's always got the answers for everything. lol
[right][snapback]693082[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I spent WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too much time studying this stuff in college....

It's a good thing I love it, huh?

[MC Just]

never mind

Edited August 22, 2005 by MC Just

[CatholicCid]

[quote name='jasJis' date='Aug 21 2005, 02:45 PM']So you are saying that Cardinal Ratzinger (now our Pope) committed a mortal sin?
[right][snapback]693154[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Even if this was the case, While he might have been a Cardinal (and now Pope) he is still only human

[Ellenita]

It's really hard explaining to non Catholics that they shouldn't receive when they are Christians and have attended a catholic mass where the priest has invited 'everyone present to receive'....(or so they say!)

[jmjtina]

I always learn something new.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

to give any sacrement to members of other churches was considered a mortal sin in 1917. so don't tell me post- vatican II church changed the idea of mortal sin. and it denies the Dogma of Extra ecclesiam nulla salus


don't have to be a canon lawyer to know that.

[jasJis]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Aug 22 2005, 07:32 PM']to give any sacrement to members of other churches was considered a mortal sin in 1917. so don't tell me post- vatican II church changed the idea of mortal sin. and it denies the Dogma of Extra ecclesiam nulla salus
don't have to be a canon lawyer to know that.
[right][snapback]694860[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Did you read the entire thread? How do you refute or address the answers? How likely do you think it is that Ratzinger committed a mortal sin?

[Cam42]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Aug 22 2005, 08:32 PM']to give any sacrement to members of other churches was considered a mortal sin in 1917. so don't tell me post- vatican II church changed the idea of mortal sin. and it denies the Dogma of Extra ecclesiam nulla salus
don't have to be a canon lawyer to know that.
[right][snapback]694860[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


There is development of the teaching. The idea of "no salvation outside the Church" has not changed, although it has been reformulated into a positive statement.

Now, your understanding of the CIC is limited, so I will give you a pass, but seriously, you are about to look really foolish......think very carefully about you answer jasJis.

I have posted the current teaching and the current law on the matter. This is what the Church holds to be true. That which you posted has been abrogated. That is binding. You must accept that. It holds the force of law within the Church.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote]It is the sole judgment of the compitent authority. If then Cardinal Ratzinger chose to give Holy Communion to a non-Catholic, then the conditions must have been met.

[/quote]

that is ubsurd. Just because he is a cardinal dosen't mean he is always correct when he makes descisions. are you going to follow Benedict blindly! JP2 kissed the Koran and he was the Pope!

[quote]Did you read the entire thread? How do you refute or address the answers? How likely do you think it is that Ratzinger committed a mortal sin?[/quote]

i read the entire thread. When a Canon from the Code of canon law denies a Dogma it must be opposed. Hmmmmmmmmm just because you are a Cardinal dosen't mean you can't comitte a sin.

i don't understand why you psudeo-Catholics hold the hierarchy in such esteem. they are human and fallen too. they commite sins as well.

Edited August 23, 2005 by Extra ecclesiam nulla salus