"Closed Communion" - Why?

“Closed Communion”

Why the Catholic Church does not offer the Eucharist unconditionally

 

"Closed Communion" is a general term more commonly used by many Protestant born faiths describing the position of the Catholic Church in regard to the dispensation of the consecrated Eucharist. In recognition of the true presence of Jesus Christ, the safeguarding of the consecrated Eucharist is and has always been of paramount importance not directed against any particular non-Catholic faith. It certainly should not be taken as limited toward Protestant Christians alone by any means.  In the sense that some non-Catholics consider themselves baptized Christians in faith and readily provide their version of communion to anyone openly regardless of faith beliefs, they do not comprehend why they are not considered entitled to receive communion within the Catholic faith. However, It should also be said the vast majority of Protestant denominations do not believe in the real presence of Jesus Christ in any communion as Jesus declared in scripture. Here we offer insight into the relationship between the Eucharist and the Catholic faithful as it has always existed.

 

Neither the Church during any period in history nor scripture supports the dispensation of the consecrated Eucharist openly without regard as to the faith-beliefs of those who may receive Him. In reading the ancient texts of the “apostolic fathers” the Eucharist has always been available only to those confirmed in their faith and in acceptance of the proclamations of Christ as the apostles themselves accepted and taught. Anyone who did not accept the consecrated bread and wine as the Body and Blood of Christ was not confirmed in their faith. In fact for a person to reject acceptance of His presence was considered heretical according to the ancient Christian texts. Such faith must include the unquestioning trust in the word of Christ. To “believe in” or “accept” Jesus Christ means to accept and obey His teachings and to live accordingly (Hebrews CH5: v9). Therefore it is only rational that the Catholic Church would maintain its position for all time and not begin openly offering the Eucharist to those who chose to depart from such serious elements of faith, let alone those who would deny the essence of the Eucharist. These circumstances would be considered more grave than dispensing the Body and Blood of Christ to those who had never been educated in the faith at all.

 

The significance of the protection provided the consecrated Eucharist in Catholicism can only be understood by those who recognize its “Sacramental nature”1 as was discussed in the previous chapter. As the Catholic Church bears the responsibility through the commission of Christ to preach His word and provide the means that all men may attain salvation in obedience [(Matthew CH28: vs18-20), (Hebrews CH13: v17), (James CH3: v1), (Luke CH10: v16)] and providing them His sacramental gifts, it also remains sincerely concerned for those who deny the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. It further seeks to enlighten those who through lack of teaching do not know the severity of receiving the Body and Blood of Christ unworthily (1 Corinthians Chapter 11; v23-29).

 

The Eucharist, The Core and life of Christianity

Who will walk away…? Who will accept without questioning?

 

The mystery of the Eucharist has always been a test of faith and a reflection of the depth of our relationship with and trust in God’s Word, even for those who walked away from Jesus as spoken of in scripture. This is first attested to in the Bible passage of “John CH6: vs51-66”. However, in its very essence, the Eucharist is the lifeblood of Christianity. Without it there is no New Covenant because the New Covenant is sealed in the Body and Blood of Christ. If we claim to be a Christian and believe in Jesus Christ, it can not be conditional or selective based on what we are willing to accept.

Our Lord was and remains well aware of those who would not trust in His word (John CH6; v64). That is not to say we must understand everything, no one can know the mind of God. But we must accept with trust in faith. As Christians we acknowledge God as the Creator of all things from nothing and Jesus Christ as God incarnate or “in the flesh”, made man. If we say we accept this how difficult can it be for God to consecrate or “set apart” the bread and wine as an extension of His very being; to spiritually take up bread as He took up human flesh or to take up wine as He took up blood, the life force of the body. Both bread and wine, as does man, come from the earth as forms of life. In this case by His word it becomes HIS flesh and HIS Blood and sustenance for our soul.

 

Divinity of Jesus

Jesus expressed His Divine authority over all creation. He did so by His word in the raising of the dead and the healing of the sick just as He raised Lazarus from the dead. We as true Christians accept these things in faith. He made the blind see, the lepers clean and the crippled walk by His word and we accept these things in faith. He commanded the demons to enter the swine and destroyed them, tamed storms, winds, rough seas, and made trees flourish or wither and die by His word. We accept these things in faith without question but we can not and will never comprehend them in our human nature. Jesus also expressed His humanity as in the tears of love and sorrow He shed over Lazarus’ death, His sadness of the sins of man, His affection toward children, His anger in the temple, and His frustration with those who slept during His suffrage in the Garden, and His sacrificing Himself for His love of man.

As Christians we are to accept these things in faith and our expression of that faith is in our trust without questioning His word. Yet there remain some who continue to deny Jesus’ proclamation of the Eucharist with no less justification than any other miracle we claim to accept. The faith of the apostles was confirmed in their unquestioning trust and acceptance of His word when Jesus asked them, “Will you also leave me” (John CH6; vs67-69). Again, we are not required to comprehend all matters of faith, only to accept, trusting in the Word of Christ.

 

One Nation Under God?

"One Nation Under God", but are we still?

Our nation is formed upon the principles of God and Christianity and we as a people claim to be predominantly Christian. Our constitution was formed to protect all religions and especially the faith of our people; the Christian faith. If you doubt it look at the murals in the capitol building and see the depictions including the cross of Christ in them. When our constitution is used by the faithless to infringe on our practice of faith, it is due to our silence to that abuse and our separation from God that allows it to be used in such a manner and it is only by our returning to God that will save this country from the eminent collapse we are facing if we remain absent of his word and morality. For those who spoof this and believe God is only loving and does not demand we live a code of charity and love without infringing on the faith and God given rights of others, they will not change or return to Him until they personally suffer the great losses a life without true faith spawns.... or the loss of the greatest country known to the world now weakened and cripple both morally, financially and in exceptionalism as it was born and previously flourished. One day their children will ask their parents, "what happened that we do not have the same freedom and opportunities that you had?" What will we tell them? We wanted free things in stead of freedom and voted for those who would give to us in exchange for the opportunity to prosper to our greatest desires and potentials?

Conscience – Good or bad?

Our conscience alone is not justification for our choices but rather the voice of reason calling out in recognition of something within us that conflicts with what we know to be righteous in our heart. When there is no question as to right or wrong and no desire to choose what we know to be wrong it remains silent and without conflict. Its voice is louder or softer as it has been nourished or deprived offering guidance prior to our final decision. It is an urging to abide by what we know is right according to human dignity providing us recognition of conflict that we may further seek to determine what moral or faithful choices we should make; but we are not forced to follow it. Our conscience is not the final determination. If our conscience is not properly nourished and well formed, it is weak and easier to convince our self to push it aside.

A simple fictional example; “Susan” has a good friend “Betty” who is married and has two children. Both women consider themselves to be Christian in faith. “Betty” has chosen to have an extramarital affair against her better judgment and in doing so she desperately attempts to ignore her conscience. Susan does not wish to upset or interfere with her friend’s choice so Susan avoids offering any guidance in opposition to Betty’s plan even though knowing Betty to be making a serious mistake in judgment that could critically alter the lives of many of those around her. Susan, although knowing in conscience she should make an effort to offer her friend guidance, eases her own conscience by convincing herself her silence is justified because “it is not her business” or “Betty is not happy with her current husband”, or some other self-determined “reason” (excuse). Perhaps Susan even finds Betty’s affair somewhat suspenseful. Yet, if Susan were to learn of Betty abusing drugs or about to drive while intoxicated with the children in the car she may be more inclined to intercede even though each instance is Betty’s “business” in relation to Susan. In each case, each choice would have a substantially harmful affect on Betty’s life and the lives of those around her. In each case, each instance is self destructive, one potentially no less detrimental than the other, and each are highly personal in nature. Our conscience knows this to be wrong but rather than follow it one may seek to convince one’s self otherwise in order to push it aside. We must rely on our conscience if well formed in matters of moral judgment. It is every person’s right and obligation to discern choices based on their urging of conscience but we must not forget that our choices may be righteous in dignity and trust in God our Creator or wrong unintentionally or deliberately, but in all cases leading to an outcome both here and in our eternal life.

The voice of conscience comes from that inherent moral code which we have naturally received in our hearts in the likeness of God. The development of a well formed conscience must continually be nourished by the teachings of our faith strengthening our morality in order that we may be righteous in our choices. We have the free will to choose but our choices are not free from consequences.

We have as individuals and as a society proven without doubt that the further we get away from practicing our faith and a relationship with God, the more decrepit our self respect and our respect for others becomes until society as a whole has turned perverse lacking true dignity at its foundation. This is reflected in the parallels between our society today and that of the society of Caligula during its brief existence. There is no denying every person has a conscience no matter how efficient or poorly formed, tainted or dormant it may become during life. Where there is no conscience there can be no soul and where there is no soul there is no life, hence each living person has a soul and a conscience...

Interdenominational communion - Can Catholics receive protestant offered communion?

Co-authored by participants of SDM

This is a subject often misunderstood by those of non-Catholic faiths and even by Catholics at times. Catholics on occasion will attend Protestant worship services such as weddings and funerals as well as attendance at times with family members who are of a particular denomination. This is permitted by the Catholic Church with the understanding it is not a substitute for the required Sunday Mass. In addition, one can not partake of the communion presented in a protestant congregation if offered. For an in depth understanding of the reason behind this, one must first understand the unwavering beliefs the Catholic Faith teaches and maintains both through various passages of scripture as well as Canon Law. For it is through these beliefs and unquestionable trust in the Word of Jesus Christ that reflect our Catholic devotion. Founded in this recognition, there is only one Eucharist instituted by Our Lord, which is recognized to be a sacrament by the Catholic Church and only one teaching that even the distance of time can never change, that being the real presence of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ in the communion elements. Here are but a few of the passages relating to this devotion rendering the Catholic faithful incapable of receiving communion under the offering of other pretenses as exemplified in other denominations.

Jesus said to them, “….Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died; this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world." The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?" Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever." These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.” (John CH6; 47-59)

[Also refer to additional verses: (Matthew CH26; v26+), (Mark CH14; v22+), (Luke CH22; v14+), (Luke CH24; 30+), (1 Corinthians CH10; v16+), (1 Corinthians CH11; v22+) and Here for more information on the Eucharist.]

The proclamation of the consistancy of Church teachings throughout Christian History:

Ephesians CH4; 3 “striving to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace: 4 one body and one Spirit, as you were also called to the one hope of your call; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all”.

1 Corinthians CH1; 10 "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you; but that you be perfect in the same mind, and in the same judgment."

The Catholic faith has maintained throughout its lineage of almost 2000 years the consecrated Eucharist consisting of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ can not be received by those in a state of sin or received “unworthily. As Scripture declares in 1 Corinthians CH11; 27-29 “Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself."

Because Catholics believe the changing of the consecrated Eucharist to be what is called "transubstantiation", they are likewise not able to receive communion in another denomination because this implies they accept the belief of that particular faith, which as we know is considered to only be representative of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ.

If the Apostles were to believe and teach that the bread and wine are merely symbols representing the Body and Blood of Christ, it would then be completely inappropriate and inaccurate regardless of ancient language, to say we “participate in the Body and Blood of Christ”. Symbolic means to be a symbol of or representing something or someone that is not present. Therefore it is only rational and with common sense in making reference to such participation would then be in the commemoration or tribute to, not the participation directly in the Body and Blood of Christ. To say one participates in the Body and Blood of Christ as Scripture confirms, the true elements must be present. In the Protestant belief system, the elemental graces are considered present but the changing of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ do not occur as communion is not a sacrament, is not presided over by those individuals capable of changing the bread and wine through the sacrament of Holy Orders(Catholic priest) and therefore again only regarded as representative or symbolic.

It would be irrelative for condemnation to be imposed against one for receiving only bread and wine unworthily. As warned in 1 Corinthians Chapter 11, "whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord."

So why has Scripture declared such harsh warnings of condemnation against those knowledgeable of the true teachings of Christ regarding taking the Eucharist unworthily? Because Jesus’ proclamation was specific, intentional and unwavering that the Bread and Wine after His consecration was His Body and Blood of the New Covenant and as such the warning becomes extremely relative that consuming the Eucharist in a state of serious sin is the desecration of His Body and Blood. Such can not occur if only bread and wine were consumed.

Canon Law of the Catholic Church regarding the transmission of communion under all circumstances;