Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well your relative would have hated my college priest who allowed me to take communion at mass as a Lutheran. It wasn’t about man’s rules for him. It was about my relationship with Christ that he was happy to help foster. So Jesus of him.

There are narrow circumstances in which non-Catholics are permitted to receive communion in a Catholic Church, if they share the Catholic belief in the Real Presence (via transubstantiation) and cannot reasonably access their own ministers.

To the extent those circumstances do not apply, a priest distributing the Eucharist to a non-Catholic would be following his own (i.e., “man’s”) rules, not the regulations of the divinely instituted Church.

I didn’t and I don’t. Still think that he was following the spirit rather than the letter of the “law”. The spirit is what’s important. Do you think Jesus would deny anyone willing communion?

I think he was pretty clear, both directly and through the Apostles, about what “communion” entails and the consequences of receiving the Eucharist when not properly disposed. The essence of ecclesial communion is shared belief, which is entirely absent when a person who does not believe what the Church teaches about the Eucharist receives it nonetheless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well your relative would have hated my college priest who allowed me to take communion at mass as a Lutheran. It wasn’t about man’s rules for him. It was about my relationship with Christ that he was happy to help foster. So Jesus of him.

There are narrow circumstances in which non-Catholics are permitted to receive communion in a Catholic Church, if they share the Catholic belief in the Real Presence (via transubstantiation) and cannot reasonably access their own ministers.

To the extent those circumstances do not apply, a priest distributing the Eucharist to a non-Catholic would be following his own (i.e., “man’s”) rules, not the regulations of the divinely instituted Church.

I didn’t and I don’t. Still think that he was following the spirit rather than the letter of the “law”. The spirit is what’s important. Do you think Jesus would deny anyone willing communion?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll go ahead and get flamed and say yes it bothers me although judge is a strong word. It's between them and God, but it feels disrespectful to me and my faith. When the priest or EMHC holds up the Host and says "The Body of Christ", the response of "Amen" is saying "yes, so be it", meaning you agree and acknowledge that statement.

P.S. I'll also say that this is theoretical, since I don't really have a reason to know the personal details of the lives of those around me during Mass.

Thank you for your perspective. I’m trying to understand my relative’s stand and am open to all opinions.

If you know for certain they don’t regularly attend mass, what would you think?

Why are you so invested about what your relative thinks of others?

You have an entire page of the same response (your relative needs to MYOB). And you knew that is the answer all along; no need to crowdsource.
Not sure what else you want us to say.

OP is trying to understand the relative, not looking for a “right” answer.

Some Catholics are judgemental about this because they are judgemental people, not because they are Catholic.

I agree with this statement. The first person who popped in to my head who would be judgmental about this topic is judgmental about everything.

Anonymous wrote:If you see someone partake that you are pretty sure is not in good standing, or are Christian but not Catholic, what do you think? Personally I do not care, but it really bothers a relative of mine.

Does your relative take communion?
If no, I understand the feeling of unfairness. They should dop Catholicism and lead a life that works for them

If yes, they should shut their mouth because they are a sinning hypocrite too.

Anonymous wrote:Well your relative would have hated my college priest who allowed me to take communion at mass as a Lutheran. It wasn’t about man’s rules for him. It was about my relationship with Christ that he was happy to help foster. So Jesus of him.

There are narrow circumstances in which non-Catholics are permitted to receive communion in a Catholic Church, if they share the Catholic belief in the Real Presence (via transubstantiation) and cannot reasonably access their own ministers.

To the extent those circumstances do not apply, a priest distributing the Eucharist to a non-Catholic would be following his own (i.e., “man’s”) rules, not the regulations of the divinely instituted Church.

Anonymous wrote: I'm Christian and was raised Catholic. I take Communion because I had my First Communion and also because I believe that when Communion is blessed by a priest it is the actual Blood and Body of Christ. If I didn't believe that I wouldn't take it, and it does offend me when agnostic family members take Communion.

But it’s not about you.

Well your relative would have hated my college priest who allowed me to take communion at mass as a Lutheran. It wasn’t about man’s rules for him. It was about my relationship with Christ that he was happy to help foster. So Jesus of him.

Anonymous wrote:To me focusing on and judging others when receiving communion is the opposite of the state of grace intended for that moment

Exactly.

Anonymous wrote:What does “good standing” mean these days?

“To be properly disposed to receive Communion, participants should not be conscious of grave sin and normally should have fasted for one hour. A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to receive the Body and Blood of the Lord without prior sacramental confession except for a grave reason where there is no opportunity for confession. In this case, the person is to be mindful of the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible (canon 916). A frequent reception of the Sacrament of Penance is encouraged for all.”

The one hour communion fast is waived for persons who medically need to eat or to drink something other than water during that hour. Medicine does not break the fast.

The criteria for what constitutes a grave (mortal) sin are (1) grave matter; (2) full knowledge; and (3) full, free and final consent of the will. These are stated objectively and the more cautious approach is to apply them to oneself objectively, but there is a subjective role for individual conscience and particular circumstances, including psychological matters, force of habit and the like. Pope Francis has explored some of these things in Amoris Laetitia, where he posits among other things that a person in an objectively irregular relationship might still be properly disposed to receive the Eucharist if leaving the relationship would do more harm than good to others, particularly children. Since conscience must be well informed, he cautions people in such situations to seek good spiritual counsel.

Communion is such a clever piece of social engineering. It keeps you in (take it every week or you’re a sinner, see this string); provides exclusivity (your can’t take it if you aren’t in the club, which isn’t easy unless you were born into it); is magical (literal physical miracles happening daily near you!); and gives full employment to a class of men who would otherwise fall astray of the moral commandments of the institution. It always cracks me up when Catholic Churches say “all are welcome here.” Sure, you’re welcome until you are immediately judged for not going up to get it. But still, it’s the glue that keeps the institution together. The other mainline denominations seem to have nothing substantive (pun intended) left in them, and thus are dying out.

Anonymous wrote:Well she’s asking if she should judge more and she has a judgy relative so I’d say they are both overly concerned about judging others.

DP.

That’s not at all what the OP said. OP asked a question hoping to understand a different perspective. Nowhere did she ask if she should judge more.

I don’t judge. I have enough that’s judge-worthy in my own life, so it seems rather hypocritical to turn a lens on others.

What a strange thing to judge people for!
What do you think you even know about the lives of strangers!

The church and bible says to take communion, to marry in church and babtize
So should we judge people who are not religious enough to have a religious wedding ceremony or not religious enough to raise their kids in a religioun but still want infant babtism?

Well she’s asking if she should judge more and she has a judgy relative so I’d say they are both overly concerned about judging others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the question is “Catholics, do you judge people” the answer is always, resoundingly, yes. (I grew up Catholic, surrounded by Catholics. Trust.)

I like my faith but I judge people like OP who are always so judgy. It’s just exhausting. It’s like some of these things are supposed to help you be more with God and all they do is create people who turn on other humans. It completely defeats the purpose of even receiving communion to me. Coloring books. Communion. These people are exhausting and have no idea how unchristian they come off being.

OP is not being judgy. A relative holds this view and she's getting opinions from other Catholics on whether that is a commonly held perspective.

I'm Christian and was raised Catholic. I take Communion because I had my First Communion and also because I believe that when Communion is blessed by a priest it is the actual Blood and Body of Christ. If I didn't believe that I wouldn't take it, and it does offend me when agnostic family members take Communion.