Atheists taking Communion

[Archaeopteryx]

This thread is potentially relevant to a number of subforums, but for the moment I think the Ethics & Morality forum suits just fine. What do you think about atheists who partake in the Most Blessed Sacrament?

For context, the Eucharist is often considered the holiest of sacraments in the Catholic tradition—it is the "source and summit of the Christian life." However, there are various circumstances where a nonbeliever, including an atheist, may feel compelled to partake in holy communion even though they do not subscribe to the Eucharistic doctrine. Is doing so wrong, and if so, why?

Here is my attempt an answer (or at clarifying the question?): For an atheist to partake in this ritual is disingenuous; she shares none of the theological commitments that underlie its fundamental purpose and thus her participation can only be interpreted as a pretence, which itself could cause offence amongst those who genuinely believe and cherish the sacrament. On the other hand, the atheist may feel subject to implicit coercion; that is, she may belong to a community where being true to her beliefs—and hence not partaking in the Eucharist—would result in condemnation, and even scorn. And so she feels that she must do so, if only to avoid such ramifications, even if it means concealing her own beliefs regarding the Eucharist.

Given the variety of circumstances in which one may be presented with the opportunity to receive communion, what should an atheist, or a non-Catholic, do?

 

[Belk]

This thread is potentially relevant to a number of subforums, but for the moment I think the Ethics & Morality forum suits just fine. What do you think about atheists who partake in the Most Blessed Sacrament?

For context, the Eucharist is often considered the holiest of sacraments in the Catholic tradition—it is the "source and summit of the Christian life." However, there are various circumstances where a nonbeliever, including an atheist, may feel compelled to partake in holy communion even though they do not subscribe to the Eucharistic doctrine. Is doing so wrong, and if so, why?

Here is my attempt an answer (or at clarifying the question?): For an atheist to partake in this ritual is disingenuous; she shares none of the theological commitments that underlie its fundamental purpose and thus her participation can only be interpreted as a pretence, which itself could cause offence amongst those who genuinely believe and cherish the sacrament. On the other hand, the atheist may feel subject to implicit coercion; that is, she may belong to a community where being true to her beliefs—and hence not partaking in the Eucharist—would result in condemnation, and even scorn. And so she feels that she must do so, if only to avoid such ramifications, even if it means concealing her own beliefs regarding the Eucharist.

Given the variety of circumstances in which one may be presented with the opportunity to receive communion, what should an atheist, or a non-Catholic, do?

While it might not have the same meaning for an atheist are we not constantly told that God's grace is for all? Why would a lack of belief be a barrier to communion. Perhaps the individual grew up in the church before losing their faith so the ritual contains a more personal meaning?

 

[Nithavela]

This thread is potentially relevant to a number of subforums, but for the moment I think the Ethics & Morality forum suits just fine. What do you think about atheists who partake in the Most Blessed Sacrament?

For context, the Eucharist is often considered the holiest of sacraments in the Catholic tradition—it is the "source and summit of the Christian life." However, there are various circumstances where a nonbeliever, including an atheist, may feel compelled to partake in holy communion even though they do not subscribe to the Eucharistic doctrine. Is doing so wrong, and if so, why?

Here is my attempt an answer (or at clarifying the question?): For an atheist to partake in this ritual is disingenuous; she shares none of the theological commitments that underlie its fundamental purpose and thus her participation can only be interpreted as a pretence, which itself could cause offence amongst those who genuinely believe and cherish the sacrament. On the other hand, the atheist may feel subject to implicit coercion; that is, she may belong to a community where being true to her beliefs—and hence not partaking in the Eucharist—would result in condemnation, and even scorn. And so she feels that she must do so, if only to avoid such ramifications, even if it means concealing her own beliefs regarding the Eucharist.

Given the variety of circumstances in which one may be presented with the opportunity to receive communion, what should an atheist, or a non-Catholic, do?

Could you give an example on such a circumstance?

 

[HTacianas]

This thread is potentially relevant to a number of subforums, but for the moment I think the Ethics & Morality forum suits just fine. What do you think about atheists who partake in the Most Blessed Sacrament?

For context, the Eucharist is often considered the holiest of sacraments in the Catholic tradition—it is the "source and summit of the Christian life." However, there are various circumstances where a nonbeliever, including an atheist, may feel compelled to partake in holy communion even though they do not subscribe to the Eucharistic doctrine. Is doing so wrong, and if so, why?

Here is my attempt an answer (or at clarifying the question?): For an atheist to partake in this ritual is disingenuous; she shares none of the theological commitments that underlie its fundamental purpose and thus her participation can only be interpreted as a pretence, which itself could cause offence amongst those who genuinely believe and cherish the sacrament. On the other hand, the atheist may feel subject to implicit coercion; that is, she may belong to a community where being true to her beliefs—and hence not partaking in the Eucharist—would result in condemnation, and even scorn. And so she feels that she must do so, if only to avoid such ramifications, even if it means concealing her own beliefs regarding the Eucharist.

Given the variety of circumstances in which one may be presented with the opportunity to receive communion, what should an atheist, or a non-Catholic, do?

The atheist should in all cases abstain and any Christian present should demand that he abstain.

1Co 11:29 - For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

And from the Didache:

But let none eat or drink of your Eucharist except those who have been baptised in the Lord's Name. For concerning this also did the Lord say, "Give not that which is holy to the dogs."

 

[Tree of Life]

Here is my attempt an answer (or at clarifying the question?): For an atheist to partake in this ritual is disingenuous; she shares none of the theological commitments that underlie its fundamental purpose and thus her participation can only be interpreted as a pretence, which itself could cause offence amongst those who genuinely believe and cherish the sacrament. On the other hand, the atheist may feel subject to implicit coercion; that is, she may belong to a community where being true to her beliefs—and hence not partaking in the Eucharist—would result in condemnation, and even scorn. And so she feels that she must do so, if only to avoid such ramifications, even if it means concealing her own beliefs regarding the Eucharist.

I think that your moral sentiments are right on. It would be wrong for an atheist to take communion because it certainly would be disingenuous or misleading to herself and others. It would also be disrespectful to the church which requests that only believers participate in communion. Furthermore, it would be wrong for the church to coerce or pressure an unbelieving person to participate contrary to their conscience.

Coercion is wrong. Being disingenuous is wrong. Being disrespectful is wrong.

The interesting thing is that atheism cannot explain why any of these moral principles should be true!

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Could you give an example on such a circumstance?

A funeral or a wedding where all of one's closest family and friends are gathered. Depending on personal circumstances, the atheist's beliefs may not be known, and there may even be compelling personal reasons for the atheist to keep her beliefs concealed, for the moment. Given her upbringing, it is generally expected that, given the option of communion, she will partake; there are no known reasons—among anyone gathered—for her to refuse to partake and any refusal would certainly be a source of gossip, if not condemnation.

 

[Dave-W]

While it might not have the same meaning for an atheist are we not constantly told that God's grace is for all? Why would a lack of belief be a barrier to communion. Perhaps the individual grew up in the church before losing their faith so the ritual contains a more personal meaning?

Lack of belief makes it potentially dangerous:

1 Corinthians 11:26
For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep. [i.e. have died]​

 

[Ttalkkugjil]

The Sacrament is for the redeemed only. The table should be well-fenced, with atheists (among others) not allowed to partake.

 

[Dave-W]

A funeral or a wedding where all of one's closest family and friends are gathered.

So might a Messianic Passover Seder, where non-believing family members are present.

 

[Tanj]

The two times I've been in a Catholic Church it was optional. At any rate, my skin smoulders and burns when I enter holy ground so it's a moot point for me.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I think that your moral sentiments are right on. It would be wrong for an atheist to take communion because it certainly would be disingenuous or misleading to herself and others. It would also be disrespectful to the church which requests that only believers participate in communion. Furthermore, it would be wrong for the church to coerce or pressure an unbelieving person to participate contrary to their conscience.

Coercion is wrong. Being disingenuous is wrong. Being disrespectful is wrong.

I agree. The atheist should not be so disrespectful. The believer should not coerce the atheist into partaking. However, there seem to me some situations where the coercion is more implicit, and the atheist feels that she cannot do anything but partake lest she be the subject of gossip, condemnation, or something worse. So while she should, in principle, be allowed to abstain, it seems that the social consequences for abstaining conspire to coerce her into partaking, even though doing so could be seen as disingenuous.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Lack of belief makes it potentially dangerous:

1 Corinthians 11:26
For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep. [i.e. have died]​

I was thinking the same thing but if they repent they should be fine and if not then they are still condemned to the lake of fire so it seems that ultimately it doesn’t matter if they do or not, other than it may be unhealthy for them in this world.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

While it might not have the same meaning for an atheist are we not constantly told that God's grace is for all? Why would a lack of belief be a barrier to communion. Perhaps the individual grew up in the church before losing their faith so the ritual contains a more personal meaning?

I fully sympathise with this, but I suspect that some more hard-core Catholics would still consider it disingenuous. After all, if you do not commit yourself to the theological concepts underlying the Sacrament, then it seems partaking it in for "personal sentiment" could be construed as, well, sinful.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The Sacrament is for the redeemed only. The table should be well-fenced, with atheists (among others) not allowed to partake.

Ok, but how should this be "policed", for lack of a better word? I have two main interests in mind here: (1) Catholics do not want the Sacrament defiled; it is the Most Blessed Sacrament and central to the Mass; (2) Nonbelievers, including atheists, do not want to feel pressured into partaking in the Sacrament, although in some communities they do indeed feel such pressure because of the social ramifications that would follow from the "defiant" act of not partaking. So what should we do? How should we approach this situation in a way that respects both of these interests, and perhaps others I may not have considered?

 

[Dave-W]

How should we approach this situation in a way that respects both of these interests, and perhaps others I may not have considered?

Some congregations have "closed communion," meaning that only members in good standing may partake. Most congregations that I have participated in make some kind of statement that this is ONLY for believers, and also give a time of reflection and repentance before hand for them to get themselves right with God and man.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Ok, but how should this be "policed", for lack of a better word? I have two main interests in mind here: (1) Catholics do not want the Sacrament defiled; it is the Most Blessed Sacrament and central to the Mass; (2) Nonbelievers, including atheists, do not want to feel pressured into partaking in the Sacrament, although in some communities they do indeed feel such pressure because of the social ramifications that would follow from the "defiant" act of not partaking. So what should we do? How should we approach this situation in a way that respects both of these interests, and perhaps others I may not have considered?

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that atheists should be so disrespectful as to partake in the Eucharist solely out of spite. That is, to be frank, an a-hole move. I don't think we would suffer any supernatural consequences for doing so, but I think it is simply disrespectful in the human sense, and unnecessary. But there are atheists who nevertheless face a difficult situation: they do not believe in the Blessed Sacrament, but they feel that they must partake in it nevertheless, either to "keep up appearances", avoid gossip and condemnation, or satisfy their family and community that the ritual has been appropriately respected. Given that they clearly do not believe in the fundamental doctrine of the Eucharist, but they nevertheless feel pressured to partake, what should they do? Or what should the community do?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Some congregations have "closed communion," meaning that only members in good standing may partake. Most congregations that I have participated in make some kind of statement that this is ONLY for believers, and also give a time of reflection and repentance before hand for them to get themselves right with God and man.

I'm not familiar with this, to be honest. Could you elaborate further? Most of the congregations I am familiar with have a fairly "open" policy with respect to the Eucharist; that is, if you approach the priest or lay person for communion, you receive communion, without any further question about whether you are a deserving recipient of it.

 

[Ttalkkugjil]

Ok, but how should this be "policed", for lack of a better word? I have two main interests in mind here: (1) Catholics do not want the Sacrament defiled; it is the Most Blessed Sacrament and central to the Mass; (2) Nonbelievers, including atheists, do not want to feel pressured into partaking in the Sacrament, although in some communities they do indeed feel such pressure because of the social ramifications that would follow from the "defiant" act of not partaking. So what should we do? How should we approach this situation in a way that respects both of these interests, and perhaps others I may not have considered?

Those who are serving the elements should serve them only to those who are known within the congregation as being faithful followers of Christ.

Communion demands a preparation on the communicant's part. To eat unworthily is to be in disharmony with the meal. Should a person come to Communion as they'd go to any other meal, considering themselves to be merely eating bread and drinking wine, if they feel neither desire for God's grace nor commitment to participate in the holy feast, then such a person will be guilty of disrespecting Christ's body and blood. Their guilt will consist in their hindering God's grace in the Sacrament.

 

[Dave-W]

I'm not familiar with this, to be honest. Could you elaborate further?

On the idea of closed communion?

The server(s) would know who is a member of the congregation in good standing. (mostly smaller congregations) and will refuse to serve someone they do not know.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

On the idea of closed communion?

Yes. To be honest, it's not something familiar to me; my earlier religious background is largely Catholic.