For Apotheoun

[Guest :: guest ::]

You said this in answer to my other question.

Can you give me some examples of Protestant churches that are allowed to take communion?

This has also been a point of contention, especially among those that claim vaild Apostolic Succession yet are not 'Catholic'

Thanks

[Apotheoun]

[quote name=':: guest ::' date='Jan 16 2005, 03:37 PM']You said this in answer to my other question.

Can you give me some examples of Protestant churches that are allowed to take communion?[/quote]

I wrote this in response to some questions about the canon 844 of the [u]Code of Canon Law[/u], and perhaps it will help explain the situation as it concerns Protestants, who, in cases of grave necessity, request Eucharistic communion from a Catholic priest:

Two recent documents of the Magisterium, the Papal Encyclical [u]Ecclesia de Eucharistia[/u] and CDW Instruction [u]Redemptionis Sacramentorum[/u], clarify certain elements of canon 844 § 3 and 4, but in this brief essay I will focus only on § 4. The Instruction [u]Redemptionis Sacramentorum[/u] states that: "Catholic ministers licitly administer the Sacraments only to the Catholic faithful, who likewise receive them licitly only from Catholic ministers, except for those situations for which provision is made in canon 844 § 2, 3, and 4, and canon 861 § 2. [i]In addition, the conditions comprising canon 844 § 4, from which no dispensation can be given, cannot be separated; thus, it is necessary that all of these conditions be present together[/i]." [CDW Instruction [u]Redemptionis Sacramentorum[/u], no. 85] In other words, for a non-Catholic Christian to receive the Eucharist from a Catholic priest, all the conditions indicated in canon 844 § 4 must be met. Thus, to receive the sacrament licitly: (1) he must either be in danger of death, or some other grave condition must be present; (2) he must be incapable of approaching a minister of his own community; (3) he must ask for the sacrament of his own accord; (4) he must manifest the Catholic faith in respect to the sacrament, which I would add includes more than a mere confession of belief in [i]transubstantiation[/i], but which must also recognize that communion signifies a unity of faith and practice in the one Church governed by the Successor of St. Peter; and (5) he must have the proper disposition. If any one of these conditions is not present, it follows that he cannot be given holy communion by a Catholic priest. The likelihood that a non-Catholic Christian could or would even desire to fulfill all of these conditions is not high, but it is not impossible that by God's grace a man could assent fully to the Catholic faith in a grave situation, and thus meet all of the requisite conditions for reception. I know from my own experience, that when I was a Methodist, I could never have met all these conditions. But anything is possible with God. In addition, the Holy Father makes it quite clear that: "While it is never legitimate to concelebrate in the absence of full communion, the same is not true with respect to the administration of the Eucharist [i]under special circumstances, to individual persons[/i] belonging to Churches or Ecclesial Communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church. In this case, in fact, the intention is to meet a grave spiritual need for the eternal salvation of an individual believer, [i]not to bring about an intercommunion which remains impossible until the visible bonds of ecclesial communion are fully re-established[/i]. . . . These conditions, [i]from which no dispensation can be given[/i], must be carefully respected, even though they deal with specific individual cases, [i]because the denial of one or more truths of the faith regarding these sacraments[/i] and, among these, the truth regarding the need of the ministerial priesthood for their validity, [i]renders the person asking improperly disposed to legitimately receiving them[/i]. And the opposite is also true: Catholics may not receive communion in those communities which lack a valid sacrament of Orders." [John Paul II, Encyclical Letter [u]Ecclesia de Eucharistia[/u], nos. 45-46] Thus, in order to receive the Blessed Sacrament a man must "demonstrate the Catholic faith in respect of these sacraments and [be] properly disposed." [[u]Code of Canon Law[/u] (1983), canon 844 § 4]

[quote name=':: guest ::' date='Jan 16 2005, 03:37 PM']This has also been a point of contention, especially among those that claim vaild Apostolic Succession yet are not 'Catholic'

Thanks[/quote]

The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Sweden had valid apostolic succession for a period of time, but since it has ordained women for many years (since 1960) the validity of its orders are questionable at best. The Anglicans also have claimed to have valid orders, but Pope Leo XIII definitively pronounced against the validity of their orders based on a defect of intention in the rite of ordination in the Book of Common Prayer. A small number of Anglican clergy have been ordained by the Old Catholics and those men would have valid orders, but there are not many of them. Moreover, the Anglicans, like many other Protestant groups, ordain women and this is an additional problem, because women cannot validly receive sacred orders, and this teaching is an infallible doctrine [i]de fide tenenda[/i].

God bless,
Todd