The creation of laws and their sympathetic interpretation facilitate unity in the Church.Footnote 2 In 1993, the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity revised the principles and norms governing sacramental sharing with Christians of other denominations, providing for the establishment of structures to enable ecumenism.Footnote 3 One key issue is the lack of general public knowledge and understanding of the Roman Catholic position. This study seeks to provide a practical guide to that position, which will be of use to churches engaged ecumenically with Rome, and to discuss the clarity, coherence and practice of such approaches.
CANONICAL REQUIREMENTS
The Code of Canon Law, canon 844Footnote 4 § 1 states the general principle that catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments only to catholics and catholics may lawfully receive them only from catholic ministers. ‘Catholics’ refers only to those in full communion with the ‘catholic Church’.Footnote 5 These are defined as the baptised ‘who are joined with Christ in his visible body, through the bonds of profession of faith, the sacraments and ecclesiastical governance’.Footnote 6 The law obliges the faithful to preserve these three bonds at all times.Footnote 7
All the baptised belong to the universal church and therefore are in communion, albeit imperfectly.Footnote 8 Reception of the sacraments of penance, Eucharist and anointing of the sick by those in imperfect communion may ‘in certain circumstances, by way of exception, and under certain conditions…be permitted, or even commended’.Footnote 9
A sacrament is an act, celebration of which in a community is ‘the sign of the reality of its unity in faith, worship and community life’.Footnote 10 All sacraments, especially the Eucharist, are also sources of unity.Footnote 11 Unitatis Redintegratio Footnote 12 clarifies that worship in commonFootnote 13 ‘is not to be considered as a means to be used indiscriminately for the restoration of unity among Christians’.Footnote 14 For Christians, eucharistic communion is ‘inseparably linked to full ecclesial communion and its visible expression’.Footnote 15
EXCEPTIONS TO THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE
The remainder of the Code of Canon Law, canon 844 deals with the exceptions to the principle stated in § 1 and their application, and concern only the sacraments of penance, Eucharist and anointing of the sick.
Roman Catholics receiving sacraments from non-Roman Catholic ministers
The first exception permits catholics to receive these sacraments from a non-catholic minister, subject to four conditions:Footnote 16
i. Necessity or genuine spiritual advantage; and
ii. The avoidance of any danger of error or indifferentism;Footnote 17 and
iii. Impossibility (either physical or moral) to approach a catholic minister; and
iv. The minister approached must belong to a church in which these sacraments are considered, by the Catholic Church, to be valid.
Unitatis Redintegratio not only acknowledges the possibility of worship in common in suitable circumstances but states that it can be encouraged.Footnote 18 Only indispensable burdens should be imposed.Footnote 19 The Ecumenical Directory repeats the wording of the canon, but states that catholics should respect the discipline of the Eastern churches whose practice differs from Rome.Footnote 20
Necessity
Danger of deathFootnote 21 or the need to confess mortal sinFootnote 22 may constitute ‘necessity’. The test for a ‘genuine spiritual advantage’ may be met when one regularly receives Communion in one's own church, but is prevented from so doing.Footnote 23
Error
The minister must ensure that neither the recipient nor members of the churches involved are in error or indifferent as to understanding the sacrament. Adequate instruction regarding doctrine, circumstances, reasons and the significance of sharing should be given to recipients, their families and the community,Footnote 24 avoiding the false impression that full communion exists between the churches concerned.
Impossibility
Illness, infirmity, or geographical separation would fulfil the test of physical impossibility.Footnote 25 ‘Extraordinary effort, grave inconvenience or great expense,’ constitute ‘moral impossibility’,Footnote 26 as would ‘serious personal reasons’, such as unwillingness to approach the only available catholic minister for ‘genuine reasons’.Footnote 27
Validity
The minister approached must belong to a church whose sacraments the Catholic Church considers valid. The Eastern non-catholic churchesFootnote 28 are intended here.Footnote 29 Therefore, according to the Code of Canon Law, recognition of the validity of the sacraments and apostolic succession within the church is vital, not simply the validity of the individual minister's orders.Footnote 30
The Ecumenical Directory, acknowledges the close relationship between the Catholic Church and the Eastern churches, their valid sacraments, apostolic succession, and consequent basis, in certain circumstances,Footnote 31 for sacramental sharing, Footnote 32 provided the discipline of the Eastern church is respected.Footnote 33
The Ecumenical Directory then states:Footnote 34
On the basis of the Catholic doctrine concerning the sacraments and their validity, a Catholic who finds himself or herself in the circumstances mentioned above (nn. 130 and 131)Footnote 35 may ask for these sacraments only from a minister in whose Church these sacraments are valid or from one who is known to be validly ordained according to the Catholic teaching on ordination.Footnote 36
Woestman, contrary to some,Footnote 37 sees this as an extension to the provisions of the Code of Canon Law and as confirmation that a catholic may, in the circumstances and under the conditions described in § 2, validly and lawfully receive these sacraments, not only from ministers of the Eastern churches but also from Jansenists, Patriotic Chinese Catholics and even the followers of Archbishop Marcel Lefèbvre, as these churches have valid sacraments.Footnote 38 This would place ministers who are followers of Archbishop Lefèbvre in the same position as ministers of the Eastern Churches who are not themselves responsible for the schism. Woestman also considers that a catholic may, under the same circumstances and conditions, lawfully and validly receive these sacraments from an Anglican minister who is validly ordained according to catholic teaching on ordination.Footnote 39 This appears to move from the ecclesial context of the validity of sacraments to the validity of the individual minister's ordination. Agreement has not been reached between the Catholic Church and any Anglican Church on the validity of Anglican orders. Establishing valid ordination according to catholic teaching would require tracing episcopal ordination to a bishop who was himself validly ordained,Footnote 40 which is not always easily verified. Moreover, an Anglican minister, who was formerly a catholic priest, would possess valid orders but withdrawal of submission or communion would constitute an act of schism.
The Ecumenical Directory therefore causes some confusion over this matter and, consequently, whether or not a catholic may lawfully receive these sacraments from an Anglican minister if he ‘is certainly in valid orders’,Footnote 41 from the perspective of Rome.
However, the Code of Canon Law, canon 844 § 4 makes provision for members of the Anglican Church to receive these sacraments from catholic ministers, but the conditions are stricter than those in § 2. § 4 does not mention reciprocity, which would be expected if this were intended. The Eastern Code, canon 671 goes no further than the Code of Canon Law, canon 844.
In more recent encyclical letters, the pope appeared to confirm the more limited words of the Code of Canon Law,Footnote 42 which carries higher legislative authority than the Ecumenical Directory. Moreover, Redemptionis Sacramentum Footnote 43 repeats the words of the canon.Footnote 44 Interestingly, Redemptionis Sacramentum cites paragraphs 130–131 of the Ecumenical Directory, but not paragraph 132.Footnote 45
Roman Catholic ministers administering sacraments to non-catholic members of Eastern Churches
The second exceptionFootnote 46 allows reciprocity. A catholic minister may administer these sacraments to a non-catholic member of one of the Eastern churches, or to a member of a church held by the Holy See to be in the same position as far as sacramental validity is concerned, subject to two conditions: a spontaneous request, and proper disposition. No formal list exists of churches ‘in the same position as the Eastern Churches’,Footnote 47 but the Polish National Catholic Church of America is oneFootnote 48 and some Old Catholic churches would be considered such.Footnote 49
Spontaneous request
Invitations are forbidden,Footnote 50 avoiding embarrassment, the appearance of proselytismFootnote 51 and maintaining respect for the discipline of other churches.
Proper disposition
The Eastern churches are ‘separated in good faith’.Footnote 52 Mutual understanding of sacraments allows presumption of a ‘proper disposition’, provided a spontaneous request is made.Footnote 53 Any restriction is a matter of discipline for the other church. Refusal would, therefore, require some objective reason.
Catholic ministers administering sacraments to non-catholic members of other churches and ecclesial communitiesFootnote 54 not in full communion with the Catholic Church
The third exceptionFootnote 55 allows catholic priests to administer these sacraments to baptised Footnote 56 members of other Christian churches not considered to be in the same position as the Eastern non-catholic churches as far as sacramental validity is concerned, subject to the following conditions, which must always be met:Footnote 57
i. Danger of death or ‘some other grave and pressing need’; and
ii. Manifestation of ‘Catholic faith’ in the sacrament; and
iii. Inability (physical or moral) to approach a minister of one's own church or ecclesial community; and
iv. A spontaneous request for the sacrament; and
v. A proper disposition.
The first, third and fourth conditions have already been covered. Because of the urgency in cases of danger of death, the priest determines whether or not the conditions apply.
Manifestation of Catholic faith
The Code of Canon Law does not explain how this test might be met. However, it must be established that the non-catholic's understanding of the sacrament is in conformity with catholic doctrine.Footnote 58
Proper disposition
It is unclear how this test might be met, but Dopo Le Publicazione implies that, provided all other conditions are met and the person lives a life ‘worthy of a Christian’, a proper disposition can be presumed.Footnote 59
Consultation
The Code of Canon Law, canon 844 § 5 mandates consultation with the competent authority of the non-catholic community concerned, before any general norms are established, either by the diocesan bishop or by the Bishops' Conference, but not before reception of the sacrament in individual cases. Dialogue is an integral part of the ecumenical movement, in order to promote mutual understanding of the doctrines and traditions of different churches.Footnote 60
THE APPROACHES
Great Britain and Ireland
One Bread One Body was published jointly by the Bishops' Conferences of England and Wales, Ireland, and Scotland in 1998, in response to the Ecumenical Directory's recommendation.Footnote 61 Termed a ‘teaching document’, its ‘primary’ purpose was to teach about the Eucharist;Footnote 62 its secondary purpose was to establish norms to govern sacramental sharing with other Christians in these countries.Footnote 63 The document refers to ‘general’ norms, to be applied to individual cases in the absence of diocesan norms, which the Bishops' Conferences ‘promulgate in this document, each for its own territory’.Footnote 64
As a ‘teaching’ document, it is neither law, nor infallible teaching.Footnote 65 Nevertheless, the faithful are canonically ‘bound to adhere, with a religious submissionFootnote 66 of intellect and will' to their Bishops' teaching.Footnote 67 Although the secondary intention was to establish norms binding in each Episcopal Conference in the absence of diocesan norms, a law is ‘a binding norm duly promulgated by a competent legislator for the common good of a community capable of receiving [it]’.Footnote 68 The Bishops' Conference may legislate, but its decrees do not oblige, unless reviewed by the Apostolic See and lawfully promulgated,Footnote 69 which has not occurred here.Footnote 70
A law must be made known, by predetermined formalities, to those who are obliged by it. Non-pontifical laws are promulgated in the manner determined by the legislator. They bind one month from the date of promulgation, unless a different period is prescribed in the law itself.Footnote 71 Although the Foreword in One Bread One Body is signed by the presidents of the three Bishops' Conferences, the document itself is undated and no date is given for the norms to take effect.
In addition, the Code of Canon Law, canon 844 § 5Footnote 72 prohibits both the diocesan bishop and the Bishops' Conference from issuing ‘general norms’ regarding §§ 2, 3 and 4, without prior consultation with the other ecclesial communities concerned, to avoid misunderstanding or offence in the quest for unity.Footnote 73 There is no evidence of prior consultation.Footnote 74 One Bread One Body is therefore, not a legislative document.
Canada
In 1999, the Permanent Council of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops approved an Ecumenical Policy prepared by the Episcopal Commission for Ecumenism.Footnote 75 This was a model, for individual diocesan bishops to modify and/or promulgate at their discretion. Other related documents were also prepared: a model decreeFootnote 76 with explanatory notes to assist bishops in promulgating it if they wished;Footnote 77 a pamphlet to assist clergy and lay ministers;Footnote 78 and a set of notes to instruct non-catholics on whether or not they might be permitted to receive the sacraments.Footnote 79 According to the accompanying information, the Conference of Bishops never intended to promulgate the Ecumenical Policy. If individual bishops promulgate it, it will be binding, but only in their own territories. The model decree suggests the methods.Footnote 80 The accompanying letter highlights the necessity for consultation with the other Churches locally.Footnote 81
Neither document, therefore, enjoys legal status, but can be considered guidance in determining ‘grave need’. The diocesan bishop's competence to legislate for his own diocese remains intact.Footnote 82 Moreover, the Code of Canon Law, canon 844 § 5 does not prevent either the diocesan bishop or the Bishops' Conference from ruling in any individual case without consultation.Footnote 83 The bishops, however, carry ultimate responsibility for the implementation of norms.Footnote 84
ANALYSIS OF THE APPROACHES
The Code of Canon Law, canon 844 § 4 leaves the determination of what constitutes ‘a grave and pressing need’, to the diocesan bishop or the Conference of Bishops.Footnote 85 In the earlier Ecumenical Directory,Footnote 86 the examples of grave needFootnote 87 are confused with impossibility to approach one's own minister.Footnote 88
The Ecumenical Directory explicitly provides for mixed marriages. The decision to admit the non-catholic party to Holy Communion must always be made ‘in keeping with the general norms’.Footnote 89 It ‘strongly recommends’ that in circumstances other than danger of death, the diocesan bishop establishes general norms for determining ‘other grave and pressing need’ and for verifying the conditions, taking into account any norms established by the Bishops' Conference.Footnote 90
One Bread One Body sets out the procedure to be followed in order to establish whether or not a case should be referred to the bishop, by outlining the questions that should be asked of those who approach a catholic minister for these sacraments.Footnote 91 These questions serve not only to ensure that the conditions are met, but also ensure that those who are permitted to receive the sacraments are not denied them. A priest cannot make the decision to admit unless delegated by his bishop.Footnote 92
The Canadian Pastoral Commentary recognises the competence of the diocesan bishop or of the Conference of Bishops to establish cases of ‘grave need’.Footnote 93 It stresses two principles to guide the application of norms: first, a broad interpretationFootnote 94 and second, no more is required of non-catholics than is required of catholics.Footnote 95 It holds that this latter principle has particular pertinence in applying terms such as ‘regular access to their own minister’, ‘serious spiritual need’, ‘manifesting catholic faith’, ‘proper disposition’ and ‘occasions of ecclesial and familial significance’Footnote 96 and goes on to state a presumption that the conditions are met if the non-catholic is aware of them when requesting the sacrament,Footnote 97 but excludes habitual reception. Doubtful cases are reserved to the bishop.Footnote 98
The first exception: Roman Catholics receiving sacraments from non-Roman Catholic ministers
According to One Bread One Body, catholics seeking the sacraments in Eastern churches are ‘comparatively rare’ and it urges respect for the discipline of those churches.Footnote 99 Although no specific mention is made of individual Anglican ministers with certainly valid orders, it explicitly excludes reception from ministers of ‘Christian communities which find their roots in the Reformation’,Footnote 100 confining it to reception from ministers ‘in whose Church these sacraments are valid and from one who is known to be validly ordained according to the Catholic teaching on ordination’.Footnote 101 The Canadian Ecumenical Policy concentrates on the third exception and therefore makes no mention of catholics receiving from non-catholic ministers.
The second exception: Roman Catholic ministers administering sacraments to non-Catholic members of Eastern churches
One Bread One Body acknowledges the close communion in faith between the Catholic Church and Eastern churches, and the possibility and even recommendation, in suitable circumstances of ‘some sharing in liturgical worship, even the Eucharist’.Footnote 102
The Canadian Ecumenical Policy, acknowledging the Eucharist as a source of grace, simply states the exception.Footnote 103 The Ecumenical Notes state that, before reception of these sacraments, certain conditions must be met by catholics and ‘other Christians’, such as valid baptism, catholic faith in the sacrament and the proper disposition. The special relationship between the Catholic Church and the Eastern churches is explained. Their members and those of ‘churches in similar conditions’ are ‘always’ welcome to receive any of these sacraments from a catholic minister if they are properly disposed and spontaneously request it. The Pastoral Commentary expressly states that the Ecumenical Policy itself ‘does not apply to the Orthodox and the other Eastern non-catholic churches, nor to the other churches that are canonically equivalent to them’. It acknowledges that the law governing reception of these sacraments from catholic ministers by members of these Churches is the Code of Canon Law, canon 844 § 3 and the Eastern Code, canon 671 § 3, and concentrates on the exception in § 4 concerning Anglican and protestant Christians receiving the sacraments in the Roman Catholic Church.
The third exception: catholic ministers administering sacraments to non-catholic members of other churches and ecclesial communities not in communion with the Catholic Church – (i) instances from One Bread One Body
Grave and pressing need
One Bread One Body holds that the ‘grave and pressing need’ must amount to more than a ‘passing desire’ or sadness because of a feeling of exclusion.Footnote 104 However, the need could arise when a non-catholic requests the sacrament of penance or anointing of the sick in the absence of these sacramental rites in their own faith community. In acknowledging the necessity to meet the canonical requirements, it judges that a ‘unique occasion of joy or sorrow in the life of an individual or a family’Footnote 105 might, in an individual case, be an occasion when sacramental reception is not only permitted, but also to be commended.Footnote 106 One Bread One Body, acknowledging the Ecumenical Directory's emphasis on the ‘exceptional’ nature of sacramental sharing, allows special consideration to be given to marriage, a sacrament of unity, between two Christians.Footnote 107 Verifying that conditions are always met is difficult and it does not extend permission for sacramental sharing to the congregation present.Footnote 108
Manifestation of ‘Catholic faith’
One Bread One Body states that persons who regularly receive communion in their own community or, indeed, who regularly attend Catholic Mass may manifest a serious commitment to the Eucharist. It does not necessarily follow that ‘their understanding of the Eucharist and its implications is in harmony with that of the Catholic Church’.Footnote 109 Each individual case must be judged on its own merits.Footnote 110 Emphasis is placed on ‘discernment’,Footnote 111 required on behalf of the pastor, who is best placed to ascertain the faith of the prospective recipient, before referring the matter to the bishop.
Inability to approach a minister of one's own church
One Bread One Body suggests that occasions of inability to approach a minister of one's own community are rare. However, ‘unique occasions’, the nature of which prevents the person approaching his or her own minister,Footnote 112 are acknowledged as meeting the test. Other ‘unique occasions’ in the life of an individual or family must be measured objectively.Footnote 113 Although giving examples,Footnote 114 One Bread One Body clarifies that there is no intention to create a category or a precedent for similar cases. The ‘norms’ apply to individual cases,Footnote 115 which distinguishes the occasion from the other personal requirements, such as the gravity of the spiritual need, knowledge and understanding of doctrine, and disposition.
Spontaneous request
One Bread One Body states that the sacrament should be requested on the person's ‘own initiative’ and ‘neither general nor specific invitations’ should be extended.Footnote 116 Except in cases of danger of death, the prospective recipient recognises their own need.Footnote 117 Adequate time should be allowed for a process of ‘discernment and judgement’, ‘appropriate preparation’Footnote 118 and ‘prayer and reflection’,Footnote 119 emphasising the deeply spiritual nature of the process and the role of the Holy Spirit within it.
Proper disposition
One Bread One Body confirms that the same is asked of Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church as is of catholics,Footnote 120 who must also be properly disposed.Footnote 121 Because the Eucharist is an ‘awesome and Holy gift of God to his Church’ it should be ‘approached with reverence and great care’.Footnote 122 A person must not be in a state of serious sin or in an irregular marital union.Footnote 123
The third exception – (ii) instances from the Canadian documents
Grave need
The first part of the Canadian Ecumenical Policy confines cases of ‘grave need’ (unlike One Bread One Body and the Ecumenical Directory, ‘pressing’ is not used) to situations where the person is unable to approach a minister of his or her own community.Footnote 124 Others must be referred to the bishop or his delegate. In the second part, the Policy permits the Anglican or protestant party to a mixed marriage, who has a ‘serious spiritual need’, to receive the Eucharist when the marriage is, in exceptional circumstances, celebrated during Mass. The Policy gives examples of occasions within mixed marriageFootnote 125 in which the non-catholic party, who experiences a serious spiritual need, could receive the Eucharist, but adds the possibility of ‘other occasions of ecclesial or familial significance’ without further qualification. The Ecumenical Notes explain the need for, and list those communities administering, valid baptism.Footnote 126 The Notes, apply mostly to ‘Anglican and Protestant Christians’ who are required to be either in danger of death or have ‘another grave need as specified at the end of this pamphlet.’ These are the cases of inability listed in the Ecumenical Policy, but also ‘special occasions in interchurch marriages’ and they state ‘a more generous policy applies to those who are married to a Catholic.’ They consider that a wedding Mass might be appropriate when the non-catholic party ‘wishes Footnote 127 it for his or her own reasons’ as distinct from merely pleasing the catholic party and family. They suggest that if a wedding Mass is celebrated and the non-catholic party ‘strongly desires Footnote 128 Holy Communion, he or she should Footnote 129 make this known to the priest in advance’. The Ecumenical Policy and the Notes sometimes omit the word ‘special’ before ‘occasions’,Footnote 130 although the Notes later explain that ‘there should be a special significance to the occasion; it is not meant to be a routine practice’.Footnote 131 The Pastoral Commentary states that, when the non-catholic party to marriage expresses this ‘desire the conditions can be explained in advance of the wedding’.Footnote 132 It defines a ‘spiritual need’ as ‘more than a passing desire or a response to a feeling of being excluded’ and, quoting from the Instruction on Admitting other Christians to Communion in the Catholic Church,Footnote 133 speaks of a need for an increase in spiritual life and a need for a deeper involvement in the Church and its unity.Footnote 134 It puts forward the dangers that inter-church marriages might face due to not sharing the sacraments as possible grounds for admitting a non-catholic spouse to Holy Communion.Footnote 135 It later points out, however, that the diocesan bishop has no authority to make a policy with application beyond cases of ‘grave need’.Footnote 136 Both the Ecumenical Notes and Pastoral Commentary explain that mixed marriages are usually celebrated at a ‘liturgy of the Word’. Both documents acknowledge that the sacraments of Eucharist and marriage are signs of unity, but ‘this symbolism mayFootnote 137 be distorted when non-Catholic guestsFootnote 138 at the wedding cannot participate fully because they are not permitted by Catholic canon lawFootnote 139 to receive Holy Communion'.
Manifestation of ‘Catholic faith’
The Ecumenical Policy simply mentions the requirement to manifest Catholic faith in part 3. The Pastoral Commentary states that the necessary faith and disposition varies according to the sacrament.Footnote 140 For admission to the sacrament of penance, both the Ecumenical Notes and the Pastoral Commentary state that a baptised person ‘should believe that through this sacrament, sinners are reconciled with God and the Church and receive pardon for their sins through the ministry of the Church’. For admission to the Eucharist, the person ‘should acknowledge that the sacrament is the body and blood of Christ given under the form of bread and wine’.Footnote 141 This faith is ‘manifested’ by responding ‘Amen’ to the minister at the Eucharist. For the sacrament of anointing of the sick, both the Notes and the Commentary state that the recipient is required to believe ‘that the grace of the Holy Spirit is given in the sacrament to help the person endure the sickness with courage’. The effect might include physical healing if this would be beneficial to the person's salvation and sins are also forgiven when this is necessary. The Pastoral Commentary states that, in the case of all three sacraments, non-catholics ‘manifest’ their faith in the sacrament ‘principally by approaching the Catholic minister for the sacrament’ having been informed of the meaning of the sacrament and the conditions for receiving it.Footnote 142
Inability to approach a minister of one's own church
The Ecumenical Policy deals with inability to approach one's own minister as ‘grave need’. The Pastoral Commentary, albeit dealing with catholics receiving these sacraments from non-catholic ministers, considers long distances, imprisonment, etc, as physical impossibility, while ‘serious inconvenience or personal disadvantage’ constitutes moral impossibility.Footnote 143
Spontaneous request
The Ecumenical Policy simply mentions the requirement to manifest Catholic faith in its third part. The Ecumenical Notes require ‘Anglican and Protestant Christians’ to make a spontaneous request. They state that the minister may not invite other Christians to the sacrament at the time of their celebration,Footnote 144 in order to avoid embarrassment to those who do not wish to receive and because it might also be contrary to the discipline of other communities. The non-catholic Christian should take the initiative in approaching the sacrament. The Pastoral Commentary states that non-catholics must request the sacrament or approach it Footnote 145 ‘on their own initiative’.Footnote 146 The minister may not invite in order to avoid embarrassment and any appearance of proselytism. The minister is permitted to inform non-catholics of the Church's policy, provided it occurs ‘outside the celebration of the sacrament’.Footnote 147 This can ‘easily’ be done by the distribution of a pamphlet to those who ‘would be eligible to receive the sacraments’.Footnote 148
Proper disposition
The requirement of proper disposition is mentioned in the Ecumenical Policy's third part. For the sacrament of penance, the Ecumenical Notes and the Pastoral Commentary state that penitents are required to: repent of their sins; resolve to do their best not to sin again; confess all serious sin not yet confessed; and perform the assigned penance. The Notes require them to identify themselves as a baptised non-catholic on entering the confessional. The Commentary suggests penance imposed should be appropriate and ‘not foreign to their own tradition’.Footnote 149 To receive the Eucharist fruitfully, the Notes state that recipients must be in the state of grace.Footnote 150 The sacrament of penance is also available to them. Alternatively, the non-catholic Christian may make an act of perfect contrition privately.Footnote 151 The Commentary also states that the recipient should be informed of this necessity.Footnote 152 Referring to the Code of Canon Law, canon 916, requiring the sacramental confession of grave sins as a precept of ecclesiastical law, and therefore, not binding on non-catholics, the minister is instructed that he should ‘exhort them to make an act of perfect contrition’.Footnote 153 For anointing of the sick, the Notes merely state: ‘Baptised persons who are seriously ill or notably weakened by old age are eligible to receive this sacrament.’ The Commentary instructs the priest to explain this.
A COMPARISON
General overview
As with One Bread One Body, the Canadian Ecumenical Policy acknowledges the central place of the Eucharist as the fullest expression of the church's visible unity and states the general principle that canon law restricts sacramental reception to catholics. Exceptions are permitted under certain circumstances subject to the complementary principles: ‘witness to the unity of the Church and sharing in the means of grace’.Footnote 154 The Canadian Ecumenical Notes hold church unity as the basis for restricting regular Holy Communion to those in full communion, but the Pastoral Commentary acknowledges that a balance must be struck.Footnote 155
Both sets of documents explain the theological principles and inter-church relationships, though One Bread One Body is more detailed. A distinction is made between sacramental sharing with members of the Eastern churches and with members of other Christian churches and ecclesial communities without apostolic succession and valid sacraments.
In One Bread One Body, the ‘norms’ deal briefly with permission to admit Eastern non-catholics to these sacramentsFootnote 156 and with catholics permitted to receive these sacraments in the Eastern non-catholic churches.Footnote 157 The focus then turns to canon 844 § 4.
The Ecumenical Policy also concentrates on the reception by Anglican and protestant Christians, having succinctly stated the exceptions in § 3.Footnote 158 The Pastoral Commentary, however, deals in more detail with the reception of these sacraments by catholics but only from ministers in Eastern churches ‘and their canonical equivalents’.Footnote 159
The relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and ecclesial communities in these islands is influenced by attitudes persisting over many years. The Ecumenical Directory acknowledges that the ecumenical task varies according to whether the predominant religion of a locality is catholic, Christian, or non-Christian.Footnote 160 A cautious approachFootnote 161 is therefore to be expected in Great Britain and Ireland.
The information accompanying the Canadian Ecumenical Policy explicitly explains that the Episcopal Commission was requested to seek ways to assist sacramental sharing and the Pastoral Commentary calls for broad interpretation. A favourable rather than restrictive approach is therefore unsurprising.
That the Pastoral Commentary includes lay ministers in its title suggests heavier reliance in Canada on lay assistance than in Great Britain and Ireland. One Bread One Body omits mention of deacon or lay minister and even prevents a priest from making the final judgement, unless he is duly delegated.Footnote 162
Grave (and pressing) need
Unitatis Redignatio leaves it to the bishop to decide when a ‘grave’ or ‘spiritual’ need arises, unless the Holy See or the Bishops' Conference has provided norms;Footnote 163 the Ecumenical Directory expects the minister to follow its instruction unless the bishop has established norms;Footnote 164 One Bread One Body, although requiring the person to recognise the ‘grave and pressing need’, which must be spiritual in nature, requires the priest, having made an initial judgement of a prima facie case, to refer it to the diocesan bishop. The Pastoral Commentary acknowledges the competence of the diocesan bishop and Bishops' Conference.
One Bread One Body does not identify categories in which admission would be generally granted. The Ecumenical Policy's accompanying letter, on the other hand, recognises that diocesan promulgation would have the advantage of avoiding ministerial consultation with the bishop, implying the categorisation of people and circumstances for general episcopal approval.
However, Dopo Le Publicazione states that ‘a general regulation cannot be issued which makes a category out of an exceptional case, nor is it possible to legitimize on the basis of “epikeia” by turning this latter into a general rule.’Footnote 165 Only after a time, when and if experience shows that particular cases frequently come to light in the same region, can the Bishops' Conference issue ‘guiding principles’ to ensure that all the conditions are met.Footnote 166
The requirement that a ‘grave and pressing need’ be ‘deeply spiritual’ in nature is a consistent theme in One Bread One Body. The Canadian documents are less consistent. Unlike One Bread One Body, which emphasises that the need is always ‘something deeply personal, but never private’,Footnote 167 and requires adequate time for the proper process of discernment, judgement and preparation for the sacrament,Footnote 168 the Ecumenical Policy itself gives, as its only examples of ‘grave need’, those circumstances which make it physically or morally impossible to approach a minister of one's own community, thereby implying that the requirement of ‘grave need’ is already fulfilled by this impossibility. The serious spiritual need is emphasised only in the context of mixed marriage. The Ecumenical Policy restricts cases to those without ‘access’ or even ‘regular’ access to their own ministers. Therefore, the condition is considered fulfilled if only irregular access is available.Footnote 169
HuelsFootnote 170 acknowledges that Holy See documents omit the institutions listed in the Ecumenical Policy,Footnote 171 but that they are ‘analogous to imprisonment and living in areas without a church of one's own’ and therefore are ‘equivalent situations’. He suggests a less restrictive translation of the phrase, ‘alia urgeat gravis necessitas’: ‘if…another grave need would urge it’.Footnote 172 The Policy acknowledges the possibility of other circumstances, for which the express permission of the diocesan bishop would be required on an individual basis. There is no mention in the Pastoral Commentary of catholic institutions' obligations to inform ministers of other faith communities of the presence of their members and to facilitate their ministry.Footnote 173
Manifestation of ‘Catholic faith’
One Bread One Body implies that the minister should assess the individual's understanding of the sacrament requested and not rely on regular worship. The Canadian Pastoral Commentary, holds that faith ‘is manifested principally by approaching the minister’ and, in respect of the Eucharist, by responding ‘Amen’.Footnote 174 The minister cannot ensure that the conditions are met nor establish that faith is not ‘limited to a mere affirmation’ of the ‘real presence’ in the Eucharist or conforms to ‘the doctrine of the Eucharist as taught in the Catholic Church.’Footnote 175 One Bread One Body specifically raises the desire for church unity with the individual. The Pastoral Commentary recognises that a ‘spiritual need’ includes a need for a deeper involvement in church unity, and acknowledges the guiding principle of ensuring witness to this unity, but omits mention of any need to question the non-catholic party on this matter. Less reliance is placed, therefore, on the need to establish agreement on the substance of the faith; more being placed on its expression.
Inability to approach a minister of one's own church
The Code of Canon Law states that, if the diocesan bishop or the Bishop's Conference judges there is some other (that is other than danger of death) grave need, other Christians who cannot approach a minister of their own community may receive. This implies the ‘grave need’ is an additional requirement to that of inability to approach one's minister. Huels agrees.Footnote 176
One Bread One Body acknowledges that an individual might approach a catholic minister when the sacramental rites are absent in their own community. It considers a ‘unique occasion’, a ‘one off’; by its nature unrepeatable and there may be occasions, the nature of which prevent an approach to one's own minister.Footnote 177 The Canadian Ecumenical Policy refers to ‘exceptional’ circumstances only when dealing with reception of the Eucharist at the wedding Mass. Within a mixed marriage, it refers to ‘special occasions’. In addition to specific examples, it adds ‘and other occasions of ecclesial or familial significance’, without qualification. Like the Policy, the Ecumenical Notes, when dealing with inter-church marriage, sometimes omit the word ‘special’ altogether, and leave the ultimate decision regarding the significance of the occasion to the non-catholic.Footnote 178 This suggests that, provided the non-catholic spouse personally experiences a ‘strong spiritual desire’ and provided that it is not ‘a routine practice’, admission to the Eucharist should be permitted. Huels holds that the occasion must be ‘special’,Footnote 179 giving two examples each of familialFootnote 180 and ecclesial significance.Footnote 181
The Ecumenical Policy, not defining ‘principal’ anniversaries, does not limit them to wedding anniversaries. Nor are funerals restricted to those of close family members. If occasions of significance are determined by the families themselves, they could include birthdays, feast days, anniversaries of deaths, times of illness, thanksgiving, holidays and celebrations of all kinds. Occasions of ecclesial significance could include Holy Days of obligation, Lent, Advent, All Saints' Day, All Souls' Day, and National Patron Saints' Days, to name but a few.
In the case of mixed marriage, the Pastoral Commentary reflects the ‘more generous policy’, referred to in the Ecumenical Notes. The Notes, on which prospective recipients largely rely, suggest that a wedding Mass might be appropriate if the non-Catholic party ‘wishes it for his or her own reasons’.Footnote 182 Moreover, if there is a ‘strong desire’Footnote 183 to receive Communion at the wedding Mass, it should be made known in advance; and the person is eligible if ‘a serious spiritual need’ is personally discerned on an occasion of ecclesial or familial significance. This might be taken to imply that the prerequisite conditions are not applicable to those in mixed marriages, whereas the conditions must be met in all cases.
Spontaneous request
The Canadian approach leaves the decision regarding both the occasion and the gravity of the need to the individual recipient, who can approach the sacrament, rather than the minister, spontaneously. This does not provide for the preparation envisaged in One Bread One Body. Moreover, Huels suggests that the ‘occasion’ may simply be an occasion when a non-catholic attends Mass with his or her catholic spouse and family, and is by that fact, prevented from approaching his or her own minister.
Although the first part of the Ecumenical Policy refers to the admission of Anglican and protestant Christians, the second part, dealing specifically with mixed marriages, refers only to an Anglican or protestant party. It should be noted that, although baptism administered in Anglican and protestant communities is valid, ‘membership’ of many ecclesial communities, including for example, the Church of England, is not canonically defined and baptism may not be an absolute requirement. Neither is baptism an absolute requirement for marriage according to the rites of the Church of England. Many splinter groups calling themselves ‘Old Catholic’ are not in a similar canonical position to the Eastern non-catholic churches. The second part of the Ecumenical Policy on mixed marriage should not be interpreted in isolation when applying the requirements to those who might be ‘eligible’. The fact of baptism and status of the church or ecclesial community should be positively established.
One Bread One Body prohibits ministers from issuing general or specific invitations.Footnote 184 The Pastoral Commentary, although warning against proselytism, permits the minister to inform ‘eligible’Footnote 185 non-catholics of the Church's stance at times other than at the celebration of the sacramentFootnote 186 and implies that once this is done they should be admitted following a spontaneous request.Footnote 187 Some form of initial selection and approach by the minister is therefore envisaged, which appears inconsistent with the requirement for a spontaneous approach. Approaching the sacrament might imply no requirement for prior notification.
Proper disposition
Both penance and anointing of the sick are linked with the reception of the Eucharist. To receive the Eucharist, which should be approached with reverence and humility,Footnote 188 One Bread One Body requires a person to be in the state of grace and not in an irregular marital union. The questionnaire suggests a positive investigationFootnote 189 rather than a presumption of a proper disposition, except in cases of danger of death when a spontaneous request for a sacrament suffices. The Canadian documents also require the recipient to be in the state of grace, but make no mention of an irregular marital union. They acknowledge that non-catholics are not obliged to receive sacramental confession even if in serious sin: an act of perfect contrition suffices. Baptised persons who are seriously ill or weakened by old age are ‘eligible’ to receive the sacrament of anointing of the sick.
CONCLUSION
The Canadian Ecumenical Policy takes a less restrictive approach than One Bread One Body, but the documents originate in territories with very different political backgrounds.Footnote 190 One Bread One Body, a single document that includes theological background, a commentary and ‘norms’, is published and openly accessible, but lacks juridical status. The Canadian Ecumenical Policy is a draft for possible promulgation in individual dioceses. Even if promulgated according to the advice given, the Policy itself would not necessarily be available to the public. The Pastoral Commentary is an aid to those who decide whether or not to admit a person to the sacraments, and to other interested persons.Footnote 191 Only the Ecumenical Notes are intended for distribution to prospective recipients. They are insufficiently detailed, despite the claim to be adequate to explain the necessary conditions.Footnote 192 For example, the explanation given for forbidding the minister to invite other Christians to the sacraments fails to reflect the requirement that a genuine spiritual need should be the motivating factor, which underlies the necessity for a spontaneous request. Unlike One Bread One Body, the texts of the Ecumenical Policy and accompanying documents do not emphasise the need for discernment and for sufficient time to prepare for reception. Publication of all relevant documents and not just the Ecumenical Notes might aid understanding of the Canadian position.
The precise tests to determine if sacramental sharing is appropriate remain unclear in both the law and supporting documents. Given the Code of Canon Law's application to the universal church, the principle of subsidiarity, the recommendation of the Ecumenical Directory and the diocesan bishop's responsibility, promulgating diocesan norms appears appropriate. In their absence, the pastor is bound by the Ecumenical Directory. However, given that Roman Catholic ecclesiastical law does not oblige non-catholics, there is an obvious barrier to communicating the requirements and the underlying rationale to members of other churches and ecclesial communities. At clergy level, a useful contribution would be the mutual understanding of each other's ecclesiology, achieved through education in core elements of their canon-law systems. At parish level, catechesis would be critical to maintain parish cohesiveness. The explanation given to the community regarding individual cases requires pastoral sensitivity, as divulging personal circumstances might infringe the right to privacy. The existence of both restrictive and broad interpretations gives credence to the principle of subsidiarity. However, in upholding this principle there remains the risk of losing clarity, uniformity and even conformity of interpretation and practice, resulting in the loss of parish harmony and ecumenical momentum.
