NonCatholicDistPB

Non-Catholics Distributing the Precious Blood

ROME, DEC. 2, 2003 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical Athenaeum.

Q: I went to a Mass once on a retreat at a religious house where one Protestant read the epistle and a Protestant minister helped to distribute the Precious Blood. Is that allowed? -- K.D., Warren, Michigan

A: In most cases, no. Any formal participation in the liturgy, whether as reader, server or eucharistic minister is a sign of communion of faith in all that is implied in the celebration.

Therefore in most cases only a Catholic in good standing should serve in any liturgical role. Likewise, before serving, each individual Catholic should be reasonably sure that he or she is in the state of grace.

There may be some rare exceptions. The Holy See's 1993 Ecumenical Directory states that the proclamation of sacred Scripture at Mass is done by Catholics. In exceptional circumstances and for a just cause, the diocesan bishop may permit a member of another church or ecclesial community to carry out the function of reader (see No. 133). The homily, however, is always reserved to the priest or deacon.

The reason should be fairly clear: because of the intimate relationship between the table of the Word and the Eucharist during the celebration. Reading the Word in this context is acting as a (sub-delegated) minister of the Church and normally only a Catholic may serve this function.

Indeed, many theologically aware Protestants would not choose to read in a Catholic Mass, even if it were allowed, as it would naturally imply acceptance of the ecclesial theology behind the selection of readings and, hence, be in contradiction with the (Protestant) principle of private interpretation.

In fact, after the publication of the revised Catholic Lectionary, some Protestants desired to adopt it for their services because of the rich selection of texts. Others, however, entertained serious doubts as to the wisdom of this proposal because of the "risk" of surreptitiously accepting the Catholic theology implied in the Church's collation of certain scriptural passages from the Old and New Testament, especially those underlying doctrines such as the sacraments.

If this is the case for reading Scripture, which at least is something we largely have in common with Protestants, then with even more reason is it the case with respect to participating and administrating the Eucharist. John Paul II has reminded us in his recent encyclical "Ecclesia de Eucharistia" that sharing in the celebration of the Eucharist can only be the culmination, never the starting point, of our search for unity.

This does not exclude Catholics and other Christians from sharing God's Word in other circumstances, especially those of a specifically ecumenical nature. The Ecumenical Directory provides ample indications and norms regarding non-Catholic assistance at Catholic celebrations and the possibilities and limits of Catholic participation in non- Catholic services.

While Christian unity is a very desirable goal, it can never be achieved by papering over the very real differences between us, but only by honestly facing up to them.

Excessive zeal in facilitating intercommunion not only constitutes a grave lack of respect for our most sacred things but, in a way, also slights our non-Catholic interlocutors by saying that we ourselves don't take seriously what for them are crucial and essential points of doctrine. This procedure probably does far more harm than good to the ongoing ecumenical dialogue.

A reader from California asks for further information regarding the practice of giving Communion to non-Catholics at Mass.

She writes: "I have been to a handful of Catholic Masses in the last year where -- for instance -- a Presbyterian minister, a Quaker, an atheist, etc., have all been given Communion. In each case, the congregation was small enough that the celebrant was fully aware that the communicants were non-Catholics, but chose to give them Communion anyway, sometimes repeatedly at consecutive daily Masses. I find this very disturbing, but have been ridiculed by priest-celebrants, deacons and fellow Catholics for objecting to what they staunchly defend as an ecumenical gesture."

While these and similar actions can cause distress and even indignation to Catholics, in general I would say that the Catholic should not refrain from receiving the gift of Communion unless participation were to indicate some degree of approval of the misguided celebrant's actions.

As we stated the other week (see Dec. 2), the casual distribution of Communion to non-Catholics -- no matter how well intentioned -- is in fact anti-ecumenical. Such an act shows a lack of appreciation of the importance the Eucharist holds for Catholics as a central tenet of our faith.

For some non-Catholics, receiving Communion is a sign of Christian fellowship. But a Catholic, while admitting this element, knows that the Eucharist is far more.

As the Holy Father has so beautifully reminded us 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).

In No. 46 of the same 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."

While Protestants who fulfill these conditions are sparse, the case is different for Eastern Orthodox and other Eastern Christians whom the Catholic Church admits to Communion if they are unable to assist at their own liturgy. Some Eastern Churches, however, discourage their members from availing of this possibility.

It is therefore clear that a cavalier attitude in administrating Communion to non-Catholics is not in conformity with a truly Catholic concept of ecumenism. True ecumenism cannot brook any watering down of essential Catholic doctrines in order to accommodate those of other faiths.