Is it a sin to take the Eucharist at two different churhes?

[annad347]

@All4Christ I told them... the first time I mentioned I was taking the Eucharist in a Lutheran church I was told its fine. I had no problem until I mentioned it on a Catholic Message board, they made it seem like I was committing a mortal sin... but couldn't tell me what sin I was breaking, everything they told me came from the Catechism of the Catholic church.

I asked again. In a meeting with one of the priest, he asked if I understood the differences in the understanding of the two Eucharist. I told him I did, he said that's good but he never I should stop. Then when I mentioned it again in confession, to a different priest. All he said was I might get confused going to two different churches, but the Lutheran church I was going to was a good one... again he didn't say I should stop or had to choose one over the other. I finished my confession, he gave me some advise on something else I confessed, gave me my penance, absolution and that was that.

From what I'm understanding here is that it really isn't a sin, but is discouraged because of the separation of the two churches.

But if the members of other churches are our brothers and sister in Christ, why do I have to be a member of only one house, when we should all love each other, be united and in communion with each other as Jesus Christ wants us to be?

 

[All4Christ]

@All4Christ I told them... the first time I mentioned I was taking the Eucharist in a Lutheran church I was told its fine. I had no problem until I mentioned it on a Catholic Message board, they made it seem like I was committing a mortal sin... but couldn't tell me what sin I was breaking, everything they told me came from the Catechism of the Catholic church.

I asked again. In a meeting with one of the priest, he asked if I understood the differences in the understanding of the two Eucharist. I told him I did, he said that's good but he never I should stop. Then when I mentioned it again in confession, to a different priest. All he said was I might get confused going to two different churches, but the Lutheran church I was going to was a good one... again he didn't say I should stop or had to choose one over the other. I finished my confession, he gave me some advise on something else I confessed, gave me my penance, absolution and that was that.

From what I'm understanding here is that it really isn't a sin, but is discouraged because of the separation of the two churches.

But if the members of other churches are our brothers and sister in Christ, why do I have to be a member of only one house, when we should all love each other, be united and in communion with each other as Jesus Christ wants us to be?

The Eucharist is an affirmation of the same beliefs and full communion, not just the same beliefs about the Eucharist. Lutherans also do not share all the same beliefs about the Eucharist - and the Catholic Church is not in full communion with any church that teaches different things.

I honestly am quite surprised that your priests said it was okay. I’m glad you told them, but I don’t see it as affirmation of the Catholic Church’s teachings. If it is considered to be ok in Catholicism, then they have changed their teaching on it over the years.

Can. 844 from the CCC

1. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments licitly to Catholic members of the Christian faithful alone, who likewise receive them licitly from Catholic ministers alone, without prejudice to the prescripts of §§2, 3, and 4 of this canon, and ⇒ can. 861, §2.

§2. Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and provided that danger of error or of avoided, the Christian faithful for whom it is physically or impossible to approach a Catholic minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.

Key words, “The faithful who whom is is physically or impossible to approach a Catholic minister”

I need to head to work, so I can’t share much more now. There is one more key point - “whose sacraments are valid”.

From what I understand, they do not consider the Lutheran Church to have a valid sacrament of the Eucharist, even if they consider Lutheran baptism to be valid: https://d2y1pz2y630308.cloudfront.net/5252/documents/2014/8/Sacramental_Validity_Guide-1.pdf

1399 The Eastern churches that are not in full communion with the Catholic Church celebrate the Eucharist with great love. "These Churches, although separated from us, yet possess true sacraments, above all - by apostolic succession - the priesthood and the Eucharist, whereby they are still joined to us in closest intimacy." A certain communion in sacris, and so in the Eucharist, "given suitable circumstances and the approval of Church authority, is not merely possible but is encouraged."238

1400 Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, "have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders."239 It is for this reason that, for the Catholic Church, Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible. However these ecclesial communities, "when they commemorate the Lord's death and resurrection in the Holy Supper . . . profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory."240

1401 When, in the Ordinary's judgment, a grave necessity arises, Catholic ministers may give the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church, who ask for them of their own will, provided they give evidence of holding the Catholic faith regarding these sacraments and possess the required dispositions.241

Ultimately this should be asked in a Catholic forum though, not one which is asking for opinions of all Christians, if you want the teaching of the Catholic Church.

 

[GodsGrace101]

I can see what you mean, I don't think that's what I'm trying to do... or rather hope that's not what I'm trying to do.

I'm not trying to force my beliefs on anyone. I know Catholic believe in a transformation, where Lutherans believe in a presence. I believe in both... and I don't understand why it would be wrong to believe in both.

Annad,
If you believe in both, then there's no problem.
I agree with you, BTW....it's just that I feel that if you walk into someone's home, you have to respect the rules of that home -- even if they're wrong or you don't agree with them.

I can say that the Early Fathers believed in the Real Presence. Sometimes I have a problem understanding the difference between that and transubstantiation although I've had to study it since I've taught in the CC...it's just that sometimes I understand it in my head but not in my heart.

 

[annad347]

whose sacraments are valid

what does that mean? Is it like a valid marriage certificate, drivers license, medical license? what does that mean? if the Eucharist isn't valid, it's not acceptable by God?

 

[Moonhart44]

To my knowledge, catholic eucharist is not the same as protestant communion. I am Baptist, but went to Catholic High school where they taught me that catholics' eucharist is a literal changing of bread and wine where as communion is metaphorical. I don't believe youd be committing a sin but because Catholicism is based on both Scripture and Tradition whereas protestantism is based on scripture, there is a possible arguement that its not cool on the catholic side.

 

[GodsGrace101]

My daughter and grandchildren live in Florence. I'm not sure how far Bolzano is from Florence, but it would be worth the trip.

Rebaptism is ridiculous! Can one be symbolically buried, then be symbolically reburied? There are some very strange doctrines around but the Catholic church leads them all IMHO.

Otzi

I live in Lucca.
45 min West of Florence.
Bolzano is about 3 1/2 hrs from Florence.

 

[Albion]

From what I'm understanding here is that it really isn't a sin, but is discouraged because of the separation of the two churches.

My view is that the conclusion is incorrect. First, this probably is not a sin. But as for the responses given by the priests, it doesn't appear to me that they were deciding on that question or advising you about whether it's a sin. If you are a loyal Catholic, and you also know that the two churches have different beliefs concerning the meaning of the Eucharist, that should be sufficient for you to know why it's inadvisable and why it's against your church's rules. That's why you were told this!

But if you disregard that advice, the priests would not want you to drive yourself nuts worrying about your eternal destiny, sin, punishment, and so on.

This reply of theirs in no way should be taken by you to mean "is discouraged because of the separation of the two churches." That wasn't their point at all and you should not comfort yourself with the theory that you are just a little bit ahead of the curve and the churches are at fault for your actions.

But if the members of other churches are our brothers and sister in Christ, why do I have to be a member of only one house, when we should all love each other, be united and in communion with each other as Jesus Christ wants us to be?

If that's your view, I'd say to do the honorable thing and cease to be a member of any denomination (or at least of those two).

 

[GodsGrace101]

Cause Lutherans do not believe that it transforms in anyway. The two views contract each other.

Would you care to express your understanding of:
THE REAL PRESENCE
TRANSUBSTANTIATION

Transubstantiation means the host actually becomes the body and blood of Christ. The body and blood are both in the host....the body and blood are both in the wine.

If a host falls on the floor and someone steps on it, it's like stepping on Jesus.

 

[Albion]

Transubstantiation means the host actually becomes the body and blood of Christ.

to the exclusion of any bread and wine, that is.

(This "twist" on Real Presence is what Lutherans reject.)

 

[GodsGrace101]

to the exclusion of any bread and wine, that is.

(This "twist" on Real Presence is what Lutherans reject.)

I understand that....I have a problem with understanding the difference.

Catholics also have Adoration.
Jesus is really present.

So my catechism kids would ask WHY? What's the difference if Jesus is ALWAYS with us?

A priest told me that He's more real for US,,,,not that He's there any more than at any other time.

I'm sure it goes deeper than that.
I do believe that Catholics make these rituals and then have a difficult time explaining them.

Praying to saints is a problem too.
Are they omnipresent??? I never dwelt too much on this when teaching kids.

 

[All4Christ]

what does that mean? Is it like a valid marriage certificate, drivers license, medical license? what does that mean? if the Eucharist isn't valid, it's not acceptable by God?

That’s something I’d ask a Catholic or in a Catholic forum, as I am not an expert in how Catholic canon law / CCC works. @Michie Could you give guidance?

I know more about the Orthodox way to follow / handle teachings, canons, etc, than I know about the Catholic view.

 

[George95]

Would you care to express your understanding of:
THE REAL PRESENCE
TRANSUBSTANTIATION

Transubstantiation means the host actually becomes the body and blood of Christ. The body and blood are both in the host....the body and blood are both in the wine.

If a host falls on the floor and someone steps on it, it's like stepping on Jesus.

Orthodoxy does not call it Transubstantiation or anything, we don’t seek to explain it or call it anything, cause it’s a Mystery. We entreat the Holy Spirit to change the Gifts.
The Real Presence is what Christ said it is, His Body and His Blood. And you thinking about stepping on Jesus, that’s a human sinful mindset, just like calling it cannibalism.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

To my knowledge, catholic eucharist is not the same as protestant communion. I am Baptist, but went to Catholic High school where they taught me that catholics' eucharist is a literal changing of bread and wine where as communion is metaphorical. I don't believe youd be committing a sin but because Catholicism is based on both Scripture and Tradition whereas protestantism is based on scripture, there is a possible arguement that its not cool on the catholic side.

That is a gross generalization, and misrepresentation. Eg. Baptists and Lutherans are protestant; yet regarding the Eucharist, we have far more in common with the CC than we do with Baptists; yet not enough in common to declare inter-communion. Theologically we have about as much in common with Baptists as Baptists have with Mormons.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I understand that....I have a problem with understanding the difference.

Catholics also have Adoration.
Jesus is really present.

So my catechism kids would ask WHY? What's the difference if Jesus is ALWAYS with us?

A priest told me that He's more real for US,,,,not that He's there any more than at any other time.

I'm sure it goes deeper than that.
I do believe that Catholics make these rituals and then have a difficult time explaining them.

Praying to saints is a problem too.
Are they omnipresent??? I never dwelt too much on this when teaching kids.

The veneration of Saints is off topic to this thread.

Regarding adoration of Christ's body and blood; so do we, but only within the context of the Mass; this is why our Pastor elevates both host and the chalice, and why he genuflects after each has been consecrated; this is why we try to consume all of the consecrated elements, so they do not have to be reserved. This is also why we bow to the Altar and kneel in great reverence to receive Christs very body and blood. This is also why we have a sanctuary lamp the burns all the time.

 

[Michie]

One of the very basics taught in RCIA is that you cannot commune in two separate churches.

 

[Moonhart44]

That is a gross generalization, and misrepresentation. Eg. Baptists and Lutherans are protestant; yet regarding the Eucharist, we have far more in common with the CC than we do with Baptists; yet not enough in common to declare inter-communion. Theologically we have about as much in common with Baptists as Baptists have with Mormons.

I kind of dont see how this disputes my statement between eucharist vs communion, unless you are taking account how individuals personally interprets Catholics transubstantiation, or if Protestants personally interpret the Communion as literal?

 

[Michie]

Disobedient to who, the Catholic Church or God?

I'm not picking and choosing what rules of the Catholic church I want to follow as in a cafeteria, if I was, I wouldn't bother asking the question, I’d just do what I want, then ask for forgiveness later. I am learning many of the things I did have issues with the Catholic Church, I now understand better, though I still fear praying to Mary so I doubt I ever will, but since it’s not one of the 5 Precepts to being an active member of the Catholic Church, so it’s not necessary. I can also do the Rosary without prayers to Mary.

I'm trying to learn the teachings of the Catholic Church but a lot of their teachings come from the Catechism of the Catholic Church as if should have more authority over the bible, that's something I'm still trying to understand. I want to be a respectful Catholic Church... but they were inconsistent with their answers.

If you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church, you’ll see it refers to the Bible in everything taught. But you must realize the Church is not Sola Scriptura. She takes into account Christian history and tradition as well.

 

[GodsGrace101]

Orthodoxy does not call it Transubstantiation or anything, we don’t seek to explain it or call it anything, cause it’s a Mystery. We entreat the Holy Spirit to change the Gifts.
The Real Presence is what Christ said it is, His Body and His Blood. And you thinking about stepping on Jesus, that’s a human sinful mindset, just like calling it cannibalism.

You said you entreat the Holy Spirit to change the gifts.
This is what a Catholic priest does.

Me thinking about stepping on Jesus is not a sinful human mindset. If a person believes that the host is the body and blood of Jesus then the utmost respect must be given to it.

As to calling it cannibalism...oddly enough the first Christians were called cannibals because it was heard that they ATE the body and drank the blood.

 

[GodsGrace101]

The veneration of Saints is off topic to this thread.

Regarding adoration of Christ's body and blood; so do we, but only within the context of the Mass; this is why our Pastor elevates both host and the chalice, and why he genuflects after each has been consecrated; this is why we try to consume all of the consecrated elements, so they do not have to be reserved. This is also why we bow to the Altar and kneel in great reverence to receive Christs very body and blood. This is also why we have a sanctuary lamp the burns all the time.

Actually, ditto for the CC.

However, Adoration is different.
It's a special time set aside...usually about 30 minutes (or slightly more) about once a month in the evening. The priest displays the Monstrance and songs and prayers are repeated.

• 

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I kind of dont see how this disputes my statement between eucharist vs communion, unless you are taking account how individuals personally interprets Catholics transubstantiation, or if Protestants personally interpret the Communion as literal?

We both accept that the Eucharist is Christ's very body and blood; the in receiving it we receive forgiveness of sins and God's Grace; we disagree not on what it is, but on how it is explained. Reformed protestants deny the real prsense (except for conservative methodists, but then for them it is a spiritual presence, rather than the true body and blood of our Lord. It has nothing to do about individuals; Lutherans, Anglicans, Catholics and Orthodox all know that they receive the true body and blood. Period.