www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology The Eucharist: Source of Unity in The Church

Note: I am posting this VIS article since it addresses the Eucharist as the source of unity in the Church. While the article does not provide much information for discussion it would be interesting if someone had the time to research the Holy Father's writings on the Eucharist as a model of unity for a greater discussion of this model for the reunification of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

The Eucharist: Source of Unity in The Church

VATICAN CITY, NOV 6, 2002 (VIS) - Early last evening the Holy Father received participants in the plenary assembly of the Pontifical Committee for International Eucharistic Congresses, who have been reflecting upon the theme of the next congress, "The Eucharist, Light and Life of the New Millennium," which will take place in October of 2004 in Guadalajara, Mexico.

The Pope recalled that the main objective of the committee is "'to make the Lord Jesus known and loved better in His Eucharistic mystery, center of the life of the Church and its mission for the salvation of the world'," as well as to promote international Eucharistic congresses periodically and to foster initiatives to increased devotion to the Eucharist.

The Eucharistic congresses are, he said, "a celebration of faith centered on Eucharistic Christ, in which the faithful, not only from a particular Church or one nation but also from many parts of the world, participate. The Church gathers around her Lord and her God."

In this sense, John Paul II continued, "the work of national delegates, who have been appointed by the respective authorities of Churches in the East and West, is more important than ever. They are called to sensitize their Churches to the theme of the international congress, especially
during the period of preparation, so that it may be a source from which the fruits of life and communion flow in the specific Churches."

After emphasizing that the "Eucharist is a source of unity in the Church," the Pope said that the participation of the faithful from different places at an international Eucharistic congress "symbolizes unity and communion."

"The Eucharistic apostolate to which you dedicate yourselves with all your energies," he concluded, "is surely a response to the Lord's invitation: 'Duc in altum!' Persevere in it with commitment and passion, encouraging and spreading Eucharistic devotion in all your expressions."

AC/EUCHARISTIC CONGRESSES/... VIS 20021106 (310)

It's a good topic to raise...as the Eucharist being the source of unity.

Now...exactly what and who is Eucharist? It is God...He is God Jesus Christ.

It just makes me ill to see both Catholic and Orthodox Churches, bishops and priests NOT allowing to receive at each other's Churches.

It is as if the Church (including bishops and priests) "OWN" Jesus Christ. NOBODY OWNS Jesus Christ as if He is a "property." COME ON!

I always ask the priest of the Orthodox Church...do you "OWN" Jesus as a property? He'd say, "NO." Then I say, "Why then aren't you giving Him to me in Communion." They never answer me.

NOBODY on Earth have that right to do that. If one is in state of grace, fully confessed all his/her sins...then one is qualified for Holy Communion provided that he/she is baptized in a valid Sacrament (which Both Catholic and Orthodox have..not Protestants).

COME ON! Of course it is THROUGH Jesus Christ...IN Jesus Christ in the form of earthly bread and wine...is the TRUE HEALING of a 1,000 year old schism!!! If we would allow each other to receive Jesus in each others Churches...then it is PROMISED that the schism will be healed! As Jesus Christ is the true healer and He is the true Groom whom He will heal His Bride.

But noooooooo....we allow our human pride get in the way!!! There are lack of love and forgiveness from each other!!!

Oh Please! I'm just trying to think positive as my stomach is turning sour thinking about it.

SPDundas
Deaf Byzantine

I have two differing opinions on the matter.

Firstly, the Eucharist is a sign of unity, and since the Catholic and Orthodox Churches are separated, it would be deceitful for them to dispense the Eucharist to the other Church's faithful; almost pretending that a unity is there when it truly is not.

Secondly, perhaps if both Churches would offer communion to the other's faithful, the grace that is given in the Eucharist would lead to mutual understanding and reconciliation. Who knows?

I know that this has been oft repeated before, but the division of Christiniaty is a mockery of God, pure and simple. If we could reunite, imagine what HUGE numbers would convert to Christianity! Putting myself in a non-Christian's shoes and looking in on our glorious religion, I find Christian division very distasteful and unattractive, but that should go without saying.

Let us all pray earnestly for all of Christendom to be reunited.

ChristTeen287

Dear ChristTeen:

I might have misunderstood you but I wish to re-iterate here what I have posted a while ago on intercommunion:

The (Roman) Catholic Church does not object to the reception of communion (from catholic priests)by Christians of ALL the Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church.(Based on Section 3 of Canon 844, 1983 Code of Canons of the Catholic Church.)

This forms part of the "Guidelines for the Reception of Communion" printed in all misallettes in use throughout the U.S., and throughout the world.

AmdG

Dear Amado:

These "Guidelines for the Reception of Communion", I do not care who edited them, are contrary to the II Vatican Council and the Canon Law (of the eastern catholic Churches):

DECREE ON THE CATHOLIC CHURCHES
OF THE EASTERN RITE
ORIENTALIUM ECCLESIARUM

RELATIONS WITH THE BRETHREN OF THE SEPARATED CHURCHES

24. The Eastern Churches in communion with the Apostolic See of Rome have a special duty of promoting the unity of all Christians, especially Eastern Christians, in accordance with the principles of the decree, "About Ecumenism," of this Sacred Council, by prayer in the first place, and by the example of their lives, by religious fidelity to the ancient Eastern traditions, by a greater knowledge of each other, by collaboration and a brotherly regard for objects and feelings.(29)

25. If any separated Eastern Christian should, under the guidance of the grace of the Holy Spirit, join himself to the unity of Catholics, no more should be required of him than what a bare profession of the Catholic faith demands. Eastern clerics, seeing that a valid priesthood is preserved among them, are permitted to exercise the Orders they possess on joining the unity of the Catholic Church, in accordance with the regulations established by the competent authority.(30)

26. Common participation in worship (communicatio in sacris) which harms the unity of the Church or involves formal acceptance of error or the danger of aberration in the faith, of scandal and indifferentism, is forbidden by divine law.(32) On the other hand, pastoral experience shows clearly that, as regards our Eastern brethren, there should be taken into consideration the different cases of individuals, where neither the unity of the Church is hurt nor are verified the dangers that must be avoided, but where the needs of the salvation of souls and their spiritual good are impelling motives. For that reason the Catholic Church has always adopted and now adopts rather a mild policy, offering to all the means of salvation and an example of charity among Christians, through participation in the sacraments and in other sacred functions and things. With this in mind, "lest because of the harshness of our judgment we be an obstacle to those seeking salvation" (31) and in order more and more to promote union with the Eastern Churches separated from us, the Sacred Council lays down the following policy.

27. Without prejudice to the principles noted earlier, Eastern Christians who are in fact separated in good faith from the Catholic Church, if they ask of their own accord and have the right dispositions, may be admitted to the sacraments of Penance, the Eucharist and the Anointing of the Sick. Further, Catholics may ask for these same sacraments from those non-Catholic ministers whose churches possess valid sacraments, as often as necessity or a genuine spiritual benefit recommends such a course and access to a Catholic priest is physically or morally impossible.(33)

28. Further, given the same principles, common participation by Catholics with their Eastern separated brethren in sacred functions, things and places is allowed for a just cause.(34)

29. This conciliatory policy with regard to "communicatio in sacris" (participation in things sacred) with the brethren of the separated Eastern Churches is put into the care and control of the local hierarchs, in order that, by combined counsel among themselves and, if need be, after consultation also with the hierarchs of the separated churches, they may by timely and effective regulations and norms direct the relations among Christians.

CODE OF CANON LAW EASTERN CATHOLIC CHURCHES
Can. 670 - � 1. Christifideles catholici iusta de causa adesse possunt cultui divino aliorum christianorum et in eo partem habere servatis eis, quae habita ratione gradus communionis cum Ecclesia catholica ab Episcopo eparchiali aut ab auctoritate superiore statuta sunt. � 2. Si christianis acatholicis desunt loca, in quibus cultum divinum digne celebrent, Episcopus eparchialis usum aedificii catholici vel coemeterii vel ecclesiae concedere potest ad normam iuris particularis propriae Ecclesiae sui iuris.

Can. 671 - � 1. Ministri catholici sacramenta licite solis christifidelibus catholicis ministrant, qui pariter eadem a solis ministris catholicis licite suscipiunt. � 2. Si vero necessitas id postulat aut vera spiritualis utilitas id suadet et dummodo periculum vitetur erroris vel indifferentismi licet, christifidelibus catholicis, quibus physice aut moraliter impossibile est accedere ad ministrum catholicum, sacramenta paenitentiae, Eucharistiae et unctionis infirmorum suscipere a ministris acatholicis, in quorum Ecclesiis valida exsistunt praedicta sacramenta. � 3. Item ministri catholici licite sacramenta paenitentiae, Eucharistiae et unctionis infirmorum ministrant christifidelibus Ecclesiarum orientalium, quae plenam communionem cum Ecclesia catholica non habent, si sua sponte id petunt et rite sunt dipositi; quod etiam valet circa christifideles aliarum Ecclesiarum, quae iudicio Sedis Apostolicae, ad sacramenta quod attinet, in pari condicione ac praedictae Ecclesiae orientales versantur. � 4. Si vero adest periculum mortis aut de iudicio Episcopi eparchialis aut Synodi Episcoporum Ecclesiae patriarchalis vel Consilii Hierarcharum alia urget gravis necessitas, ministri catholici licite eadem sacramenta ministrant ceteris quoque christianis plenam communionem cum Ecclesia catholica non habentibus, qui ad ministrum propriae Communitatis ecclesialis accedere non possunt atque sua sponte id petunt, dummodo circa eadem sacramenta fidem manifestent fidei Ecclesiae catholicae consentaneam et rite sint dispositi. � 5. Pro casibus, de quibus in �� 2, 3 et 4, normae iuris particularis ne ferantur nisi post consultationem cum auctoritate competenti saltem locali Ecclesiae vel Communitatis ecclesialis acatholicae, cuius interest.

When have the Orthodox, Assyrian and Polish National Churches come into the communion with the Roman See? That is real Ecumenism or are they pulling our and their legs?

Yours in Christ,
Francisco

I disagree, Francisco. I do not see how the Guidelines are contrary to either Canon Law or Vatican II. I believe it is an honest and canonical attempt to start the healing process with ligitimate Apostolic congregations.

Dmitri

I believe the guidelines that Amado posted are appended, as well, with something like "Christians of these confessions should follow the guidelines of their own church".

Dear Francisco:

I believe you misunderstood me.

My post was about receiving the Holy Eucharist, physically, during Communion in a Roman Mass.

I am not talking about the re-union among the Apostolic churches.

I am just pointing out that the Roman Catholic Church allows, or does not object, for Christians of Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church to receive the Holy Eucharist during communion in a Latin Mass.

The reverse is not true as far as many Orthodox Churches are concerned. We, Catholics, cannot just go and receive the Holy Eucharist during communion in a Divine Liturgy, although the Catholic Church allows us to do so where there is no Catholic Church around.

In sum, Catholics are more "ecumenical" as far as the reception of the Holy Eucharist by non-Catholics is concerned.

Intiendes, Sr. Don Francisco?

AmdG

Dear Dmitri, Dear Amado Guerrero,

The Canon Law (of the Eastern Catholic Churches) clearly states that "Ministri catholici sacramenta licite solis christifidelibus catholicis ministrant, qui pariter eadem a solis ministris catholicis licite suscipiunt” i. e. “Catholic ministers are allowed (licite) to administrate the sacraments only to the Catholic Christian faithful, who in the same way are allowed (licite) to receive the same sacraments only from the Catholic ministers”. That's the expression of the ecclesiology and canonical tradition of both the Catholic and the Orthodox Church: “One Lord, one faith, one baptism”. The “communio in sacris” is the expression of the perfect ecclesiastic communion not a way to achieve it. Did the “communion in sacris” drive our Protestant brothers (Anglicans, Lutherans) to the unity? Certainly, not. Ecclesiastic Communion>Eucharistic Communion and not Eucharistic Communion> Ecclesiastic Communion used to be the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church but things change too quickly in Rome. Who knows? I understand that when the Catholic Church allows our Orthodox brothers to receive Holy Communion in the Catholic Church although the Orthodox Church does not allow her members to receive Holy Communion in the Catholic Churches she is allowing or driving our Orthodox brothers to disobey their Church. “Disobedience” and “indifferentism” are two powerful proselytistic means (the II Vatican Council with its “healthy” ecclesiology did strongly condemn both “indifferentism” and “disbedience”: “Common participation in worship which harms the unity of the Church or involves formal acceptance of error or the danger of aberration in the faith, of scandal and indifferentism, is forbidden by divine law”). What is, then, the different between “Eucharistic hospitality“ and “Eucharistic hospitality used with proselytistic purposes“? I consider that it is not only possible but also a good thing to allow our Orthodox brothers to receive the holy sacraments in the Catholic Church only when it is physically or morally impossible for them to receive these sacraments from an Orthodox priest after telling them about the official teaching of their Church about “communio in sacris” and after giving them the address and telephone number of the nearest Orthodox priest. If we do not do so we are not being loyal with our “Sister Church”. In sum, I desagree with Amado's statement that “Catholics are more "ecumenical" as far as the reception of the Holy Eucharist by non-Catholics is concerned” for two reasons:1) the Catholic Church strongly condemn the “communio in sacris”
“which harms the unity of the Church or involves formal acceptance of error or the danger of aberration in the faith, of scandal and indifferentism” and allows the members of the Orthodox Church to receive the sacramnts in the Catholic Church only under special circunstances and for pastoral reasons (not theological not canonical); and 2) I do not if these “new rules” about “communio in sacris” in the Catholic Church have got “ecumenical” or “proselytistic” purposes.

Sigo sin entender

Yours in Christ,
Francisco

Francisco,

Again, although I understand your point, I do not think that the exception was done for the reasons you state. By allowing the Orthodox to receive in our Churches (if they choose and based on their beliefs) it is not proselytising unless there is an honest attempt to teach the Catholic Faith over that of the Orthodox in that communion.
As I see it, it opens up a situation such as is had by the Italo-Albanese. They are welcome to the Holy Mysteries in both Catholic and Orthodox churches although they are very much Catholic. On the other hand, Catholics are permitted by the Episcapalians (Anglicans) to receive in their churches yet few would dare.
Personnally, I don't see many Orthodox running to the local Catholic Church (Byzantine or otherwise) to receive anyway. I must say, however, that I do feel it is an insult to the Orthodox at some level as I do not believe they were consulted in this decision.
Perhaps, the Vatican and the EP and others should really sit down to talk about this. I could be the starting point of a new dialogue.

St. Michael the Archangel, pray for us and protect us from strife.

Dmitri

Dear Dmitri,

I am very happy that you can see my point (to promote “indifferentism” and “disobedience” among our Orthodox brothers towards the teaching and the canon law of their Church about “communio in sacris” is not “ecumenical” at all and it is clearly contrary to a healthy ecclesiology and Christian charity) as you say “I do feel it is an insult to the Orthodox at some level as I do not believe they were consulted in this decision”.

You say “They (Italo-Albanese) are welcome to the Holy Mysteries in both Catholic and Orthodox Churches although they are very much Catholic”. As far as I know the Orthodox Church does not practice the “communion in sacris” with the Italo-Albanese Byzantine Catholics). Historically speaking “intercommunion” between Catholics and Orthodox was practiced also in the Greek islands under Venetian domination (during these periods our Orthodox brothers were under the jurisdiction of the Latin bishops as far as they have not the right to elect bishops for themselves so that tha is was a compulsory and not a free “communio in sacris”) and among the Eastern Slavs under Polish and Lithuanian domination.

You say “Catholics are permitted by the Episcapalians (Anglicans) to receive in their churches yet few would dare”. So that the Catholic Church refuse the “communion in sacris” that our Anglican brothers offers us, why should not the Orthodox Church do the same with the “communion in sacris” we are offering to them? Have the “communion in sacris” with the Anglicans (practiced by our Anglican brothers) dive us to the Union of the catholic and the Aglican Church? Certainly, not.

You say “Personnally, I don't see many Orthodox running to the local Catholic Church (Byzantine or otherwise) to receive anyway”. Well can not give you details but I have seen many many times Orthodox receiving Holy Communion in the Roman Catholic Church. Many Orthodox think: “It is so easy to receive Communion in the Roman Catholic Church, you do not need to fast for days (oil included), to confess yours sins to the priest, to recite the “Office of Holy Communion” and to wake up early in the morning to go to the Orthodox Church . You just go to the Roman Catholic church and you get up when they give the Holy Communion!!!”. Unfortunately there are a lot of Orthodox Christians unaware of the teachings of their own Church as like as the teaching of the Catholic Church. The solution for them it is not to give them Holy Communion in the Catholic Church, something that could drive them and us to the "inddiferentism" (the Orthodox and the catholic Church are the same and they believe the same things) but to send them to a good, tolerant and capable Orthodox spiritual father.

Yours in Christ,
Francisco

Yes, I think we can both agree that education is needed on both Catholic and Orthodox sides. I think the greatest harm to true unity is ignorance by the individual laity (and some clergy)about their own Church.

Wisdom! Let us be attentive!

Dmitri

Hi:

Are you sure you're quoting the COMPLETE canon?

The corresponding canon for the Latin Canon Law is Canon 844. Please notice that the first paragraph is virtually identical to what you are quoting, but there is more to this Canon. I quote the whole thing:

Canon 861 refers exclusively to Baptism, so I will not quote it as it is irrelevant to this discussion.

So, when communicatio in sacris poses danger of error or indifferentism, then it is to be avoided.

But, when that danger is prevented, such expressions of communion are allowed.

The Catholic Church doesn't have an open Communion policy as some Protestant denominations do and no, we don't think that Ecclesial Unity can be derived from Eucharistic Unity.

Catholic Ecclesiology is indeed Catholic, Universal. Read "Lumen Gentium" and you will find that all human beings are in one way or another related to the Church.

In particular, all baptized Christians have a membership relationship with the Catholic Church, even if they are not in full communion with her.

By allowing properly disposed baptized Christians with a Catholic Eucharistic theology to receive the Eucharist from a Catholic minister we are not going beyond the boundaries of the Church, because the Church still subsists in the particular Churches, even if they are not in full communion with Rome.

I understand your concern about proselytism, but please do notice that the Catholic discipline requires that the non-Catholic requesting the sacraments to "spontaneously ask for them", therefore, it is against the law to offer the sacraments as "bait" for basket-fishing.

Let me insist, I don't say it doesn't happen, I just say that if and when it happens, it is wrong and against the Catholic discipline.

Making the sacraments available to non-Catholics is because of concern for their spiritual needs, not to seek their conversion.

Shalom,
Memo.

The idea that the eucharist as a source of unity is foreign to both Orthodox and traditional Catholic thought. As has been rightly pointed out, it is the visible expression of unity of the people of God.

As I have pointed out before, the creed in the Eastern liturgy is prefaced by the words, 'let us love oneanother that with one mind we may confess, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, the Trinity, consubstantial and undivided.'

This presupposes total unanimity in matters of faith: not 99% - not 99.99%, but 100%.

Now the ecumenists would use the Eucharist, not as a source of grace, since many of them don't admit that concept, but as a tool to 'unite'.

I passed an Anglican church a few weeks ago and on its notice board it offered holy communion to all Christians regardless of denomination. How sad! A nice idea, yes, but what a travesty. It makes dogma optional, eliminating any idea of truth, of error and of right belief.

The Early Undivided Church was even stricter than now. Let's remember that the catechumens and penitents were dismissed before the anaphora. Since they were divided from the fulness of community-life by lack of baptism or by an unfulfilled penance, even they could not be present for the eucharistic liturgy.

In the priestless congregations of the Old Rite a penitent must stand at the back and cannot even receive a blessing with the censer.

All of this is not designed to hurt or exclude, but to remind us that the bond of faith lies at the centre of community. Our expression of this unity is the Liturgy, whether this is the Eucharist or any other act of communal worship.

The Church does not require political correctness, but faithfulness to Tradition. The Orthodox Church requires Orthodoxy of those who approach the Holy Gifts, not only in matters of dogma, but also in terms of belonging to the community of faith, holding no views contrary to Holy Tradition - belonging in an organic and living relationship of faith.

With love in Christ -
Mark, monk and sinner.

In Catholicism, if one has not confessed mortal sins and is therefore still in a state of mortal sin, one should never receive communion. This goes for people who are in disaccord with the Church, as well.

ChristTeen287