Fr Brendan Gatt
Bishops, priests and cohabiting Catholics
Canon law does not make for easy sound bites. The current controversy concerning cohabiting couples and whether they should (or can) receive Holy Communion amply illustrates this. It reminds us that when applied to concrete - often painful - situations, the task of explaining the Church's position unequivocally is more urgent and difficult.
Various readers have claimed that the opinions expressed by some priests are at odds (dissenting, even) with our bishops' clarification on this matter. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The bishops stated that people who live together outside of marriage should not receive Holy Communion. And lest people think the Church is targeting cohabiting couples, Bishop Mario Grech amplified this point in recent days, explaining that this position applies equally to anyone who has committed mortal sin and has not had recourse to the sacrament of reconciliation.
The fact that the responsibility to abstain falls on the people involved, it appears, is a nuance that still eludes certain readers. In fact, some continue to infer a contradiction between the bishops' position and answers given by some priests to certain questions on this issue.
I, for instance, was quoted as saying it is for the individual to decide whether to receive Holy Communion, not the priest. An attentive reading of these words will show there is no contradiction.
Whereas the bishops were outlining the general principle (enshrined in Scripture, by the way) that people who commit mortal sin should not receive Holy Communion, I was answering a very specific question concerning a concrete situation: whether a priest administering Holy Communion should deny it to cohabiting couples (the assumption being that they are well-intentioned).
In my answer, I attempted to condense the content of various canons (articles of Church law). Canon 915, for instance, states that those who have been excommunicated, interdicted or obstinately persist in manifest (i.e. public) grave sin are not to be admitted to Communion. Canon 220, on the other hand, states that no one may unlawfully harm the good reputation which a person enjoys.
Mindful of these laws, our bishops prudently placed the onus of the decision on the person rather than on the ministers of Communion (be they priests, deacons or laymen). For believers, the actual distribution of Holy Communion is a holy and precious moment: it would be preferable if awkward scenes of people being told to refrain from receiving Communion are avoided.
I reiterate that my answer did not refer to the wider issue about what guidelines priests should give such people during sacramental confession, or in spiritual direction. That is a separate matter which has already been tackled by the bishops and with which, needless to say, I am in complete agreement.
In fact, I have elsewhere stated that if a parish priest is aware that couples living together outside of marriage would like to receive Holy Communion, he should seek to approach them discreetly and engage them in friendly dialogue.
Such dialogue would hopefully help form their conscience and enable them to understand that, as a general rule, their situation precludes them from receiving Communion. It would also enlighten them about the risk of giving scandal, which is a most serious matter and must be avoided at all costs.
And as I stated in answer to some doubts voiced online, the question of whether certain categories of people should receive Holy Communion is only one part of the story, albeit an important one.
We desperately need to move away from the reductive view which considers the Eucharist as a reward, or a mere obligation. It is Our Lord's gift of Himself and should be treated as such. It is not a rite of passage or a form of 'checking-in' (as sadly happens at some public functions like funerals, weddings or First Holy Communions).
And while the Eucharist should constitute the pinnacle of a Catholic's efforts to live an authentically Christian life, the measure of a person's faith is much wider than whether they receive Holy Communion or abstain. The bishops' invitation to cohabiting couples to participate in the life of the Church means that - even if their situation deprives them of Holy Communion - in the Church they will always have a family and a home.
Fr Gatt is a canon lawyer.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
7 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Mr saviour marquette
May 21st 2011, 11:13
God knows all your needs before you even ask Him so why bother telling a priest your problems when you can go straight to God, for all we know the priest could be a bigger sinner then you and me.
Joe Zammit
Jun 14th 2010, 20:32
All sinners are invited to go to church with the community and do their best to draw nearer to Jesus as much as possible. Dropping from church attendance will do harm to the dropper himself or herself. Sinners are invited by Christ to repent, receive the Sacrament of Confession and then they can receive the Eucharist worthily. If sinners receive Holy Communion unworthily, i.e., in grave sin, they would be bringing God's condemnation upon themselves. They would be harming only themselves. It is possible for all sinners to convert. There is absolutely no case where conversion is not possible. But conversion demands of us to deny COMPLETELY ourselves to do God's loving will and enter into his friendship. What a wonderful life it is to be a friend of God! Besides, they had better remember also that death can fall upon them like a thief!
victor rodenas
Jun 13th 2010, 16:34
I know that mortal sins are sins that go against the 10 commandments.ex.....thou must not steal,is a commandment........if I steal 10 euro from a rich man ,is that a mortal sin....I wish that fr.B.Gatt gives us a list of mortal sins,because I think we do not know exactly what they are............I would also wish to know if evading income tax and vat (huge amounts) is a mortal sin ,and if so, must the money defrauded be returned to the Govt. for the sin to be absolved.thank you.
Joseph Calleja
Jun 13th 2010, 16:10
Father Gatt skip the mincing of words and please give us a simple answer.
If I live (cohabitate) with a partner, male or female, can I receive Holy Communion. YES OR NO? It is a very simple question and deserves a simple answer.
If I am gay or lesbian living with a partner, can I receive Holy Communion? YES or NO?
Why do you and the Bishops make things look so complicated, when a simple yes and no would do. The answers you give are very confusing, it's like politicians, you say a lot but nothing comes out. If I am in any of these situations, is it up to me to decide if I want to receive communion or is it a definite NO. This is not a multiple choice question and Yes or No will do. Stop beating around the bush and come out with one answer without too many words.
renald williams
Jun 13th 2010, 14:57
bishops? Christians should read the New Testament of Jesus! peace and health wishes
Il-Katekizmu tal-Knisja Kattolika
Pagna 348 Paragrafu 1577 - Ara 1 Tim 3:1-13, Titus 1:5-9.
1 Tim 3:1-13. - L-ghazla ta’ l-isqof. - Din kelma ta’ min joqghod fuqha… Jehtieg, imma, li
l-isqof… li jkun ragel ta’ mara… li jkun ragel jaf imexxi tajjeb id-dar tieghu;
u li jzomm lil uliedu…
Ghax jekk wiehed ma jkunx jaf imexxi ‘l daru stess, kif jista’ jiehu hsieb il-Knisja ta’ Alla?
L-ghazla tad-djakni. - Hekk ukoll id-djakni… Hekk ukoll in-nisa taghhom…
Id-djakni jkunu rgiel… mizzewgin ma’… mara wahda,
u li jkunu jafu jmexxu ‘l uliedhom u ‘l djarhom sewwa.
Titus 1:5-9. - Tahtar presbiteri f’kull belt, skond ma ordnajtlek. Kull min ikun mahtur…
ikun ragel ta’ mara wahda, u jkollu uliedu jemmnu…
L-isqof… ghandu jkun… bniedem li jzomm shih mal-kelma.
Uhud jitilqu mill-fidi, billi jaghtu widen… ghal taghlim tad-demonji … ma jridux zwieg.
1 Timotju 4:1-3.
Ha jkun imweggah iz-zwieg f’kollox. Lhud 13:4.
Callistus – The Refutation of all Heresies 9
isqfijiet u djakni…jkunu mizzewgin.
Socrates Scholasticus - Ecclesiastical History 5
l-isqfijiet ikollhom tfal min-nisa taghhom
William P Flynn
Jun 13th 2010, 12:36
I am not the least bit interested about Canon Law. I don't even think it is appropriate that it should be discussed in a secular paper.
I couldn’t care less what so and so said centuries ago about who’s pure enough or isn't to receive communion?
I think this is a convenient red herring to frustrate the divorce argument and muddle it further.
But that's me. I don't allow any religion to interfere remotely with whatever I do.
But I am still caught by something straight out of the Inquisitor's "Manual" called Chapter 1 Article 2(2) of our Constitution. This Article 2 gives Catholic Authorities the DUTY to teach me what is right and what is wrong-for me.
It gives this canon lawyer and other like him to have an impact on my life by virtue of one reason-I am Maltese. At present I don't live there but if i ever did, I would be like every maltese person resident in Malta
I resent Article 2 and object most strongly against that Catholic power over me. But maybe you don't.
Please vote in this poll, one way or the other: (Maltese Citizens only please):
http://www.fuse.com.au/wpf/Malta-Poll1.html
v mercieca
Jun 13th 2010, 15:01
No one is forcing you or anyone to embrace the Catholic religion. You may wish to choose not to believe in any religion, but if you choose to form part of a religious group, you have to take what is convenient for you and what is not convenient.
Our Constitution states that the Catholic religion is the official religion of Malta but it also states that it allows the practice and freedom of other religions including atheists if one wishes not to believe in anything.
However, every religion requires its members to follow the rules and regulations as handed to them by “Devine” inspiration.
We Christians are lucky as the rules and regulations were handed directly by Jesus the second person of the Holy Trinity. Catholics are even luckier as our church did not temper with what was handed down by Jesus and kept following His strict rules.
If you do not feel comfortable in the Catholic Church, I shall suggest to do as Jesus said to Peter “Would you like to go too”. If you read the gospels, you know what Peter replied.