Joe Biden, Communion, and Politicizing the Eucharist
What does the Catholic Church teach about who may receive Holy Communion?
The Eucharist is not a gift given to individual Christians by the Church. It is a gift given to the Church by Christ. If we want to participate in that gift, we must do so as members of the Church.
The question of pro-abortion Catholic politicians receiving Communion has been getting a lot of press lately. Joe Biden, our nation’s second Catholic president, is both adamantly pro-abortion rights and also, by all reports, a frequent Mass-goer. Should a politician who publicly advocates for something the Church teaches is gravely immoral, such as abortion, be admitted to Holy Communion? Is it the place of Catholic priests and bishops to make judgments about individuals’ worthiness to receive the sacrament? Is it wise to “politicize the Eucharist?”
With the US bishops seemingly having trouble deciding whether or not to even have a discussion about these questions, it’s no wonder the faithful are confused. The problem is only exasperated by the fact that most people hear about this primarily from secular news sources not versed in either Canon Law or sacramental theology. So let’s take a step back from the heated reporting and look at the doctrine and discipline of the Catholic Church that lies behind this debate.
Who Can Receive Communion?
Before we begin talking about why someone might be denied Holy Communion, it would be good for us to first look at the question of who can receive Communion? The Catholic Church does not practice open Communion — it’s not a free for all. The Eucharist is one of the sacraments of initiation by which a person is made a full member of the Roman Catholic Church. Before one is admitted to Holy Communion, there are certain criteria.
First, one has to be baptized. Baptism is the gateway to the life of the sacraments. It is what first incorporates us into the Church through our sacramental death and rebirth with Christ.
Second, one has to be in communion with the Catholic Church. There is a reason we refer to the sacrament of the Eucharist as “Communion.” The word communion means “to be one with” and the act of receiving the Eucharist in Holy Communion is a sign not only of our unity with Christ in the sacrament, but also of our unity with Christ in the Church. This is why Protestants are not admitted to Holy Communion in the Catholic Church. It’s not that we don’t love them. But, by definition, Protestant Christians are not in communion with the Catholic Church. Receiving Communion when one is not in fact in communion is a dishonest act (more on that in a moment).
Third, assuming one is a baptized Catholic, one still must be “properly disposed” to receive the Eucharist. What does that mean?
Canon Law and Holy Communion
Canon Law (the legal code of the Roman Catholic Church) provides the ground rules about what it means to be properly disposed to receive the Eucharist. And it is strongly prejudiced toward giving someone Holy Communion.
Any baptized person who is not forbidden by law may and must be admitted to Holy Communion (can. 912).
So who is forbidden by law? That’s spelled out in canon 915.
Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to holy communion (can. 915).
Excommunication means someone has formally been declared outside of communion with the Church. It is a penalty imposed for very serious matters such as apostasy, desecrating the Eucharist, or physically attacking the Pope. But what about the second part of that statement that says those “who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion”? This is where the rubber meets the road regarding pro-abortion politicians receiving the Holy Eucharist.
To many who are not familiar with the nuances of Catholic sacramental theology, it sounds judgmental to say people who sin shouldn’t receive Holy Communion. Aren’t we all sinners? Isn’t it unjust to cherry-pick certain sins we don’t like, such as abortion, and not also deny Communion to people who sin in other ways?
We should carefully note here that Canon Law does not anywhere say Communion should be denied to all sinners. It specifically refers to those who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin. This is important. Let’s look at these criteria one by one.
Grave Sin
The word grave here simply means “serious.” While all sin is a failure to love God and neighbor as we ought, some sin is more serious than others. This is a Biblical principle, as expressed in 1 John 5:17: “All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that is not deadly.” Another term for deadly sin is mortal sin or grave sin.
Venial (non-mortal) sin is a failure to love as we ought due to human weakness and imperfection. Such sin may weaken the life of grace, but is not a rejection of God’s love. Mortal sin is different. Mortal sin is not simply a failure to live in accord with God’s love, but it is incompatible with that love. That’s what makes it deadly. It’s deadly to a life of grace.
To be in a state of mortal sin requires three things: grave (serious) matter, sufficient knowledge, and free will. If we are doing something gravely wrong, we know it’s wrong, and we choose it anyway, it is as if we have said to God, “Lord, I know this thing that I want to do is incompatible with your life of grace, but I want this sin in my life more than I want you.” If that’s our choice, God allows it, because his love prevents him from violating our free will. God still loves us, but he cannot be with us if we evict him from our hearts by participating in acts contrary to his life of love. Though we may be unfaithful, God himself will remain faithful (2 Tim 3:15).
When we knowingly and willingly commit a mortal sin, it is not God who leaves us, but we who leave God. And to receive Holy Communion after having rejected God in such a way is harmful to us. This is a Biblical principle.
Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself (1 Cor 11:27–29).
This is why the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches, “Anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion” (CCC 1385). This is also articulated in Canon Law.
Anyone who is conscious of grave sin may not . . . receive the Body of the Lord without previously having been to sacramental confession, unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, which includes the resolve to go to confession as soon as possible (can. 916).
Remember what I said above about receiving Communion while not actually being in communion with the Church? It applies here, as well. To be in a state of mortal sin places one outside of communion with God and his Church. The sacrament of reconciliation has been given to us as a remedy for this. The whole point of confession is to return us to the Eucharist. It is the sacrament through which one comes to God, as the prodigal son returns to the Father, seeking forgiveness and restoration. Our Father who loves us very much may allow us to stray, but he always welcomes us back home should we, like the prodigal son, decide to rise up and return to our Father.
When we approach the altar to receive Holy Communion without first repenting of our sins and being reconciled to God, we turn what should be the most intimate sign of union with our God into a dishonest act. This does us grave spiritual harm by adding the sin of sacrilege to whatever other mortal sin we have committed. In other words — and this is important — the reason why the Church would deny Communion to someone in a state of mortal sin is because we love them and do not want them to suffer more spiritual harm.
The Church doesn’t exclude people from communion. Sin excludes people from communion. The Church wants to restore people to communion through repentance and reconciliation.
Manifest Sin
As a minister of Holy Communion, when someone approaches to receive the Sacrament, I can’t tell from looking at them whether they are in a state of grace or a state of mortal sin. I can’t read their mind and heart. Even if somehow I have knowledge that they have committed a grave sin, I don’t know whether they did so with sufficient knowledge or freedom. I also don’t know whether they may have been to confession.
So what do I do? I give them Holy Communion.
Everything I just wrote above about the need to discern whether one is properly disposed to receive the Eucharist applies to the individual communicant. That’s something every Catholic is called to do for themselves before receiving Communion. It’s not the job of the minister distributing Communion to make that determination. We can’t read souls.
This is something the secular media often misses. It’s not as if Catholic ministers are deciding who gets to receive Communion or not. Generally speaking, anyone who approaches gets to receive. That’s why Canon 915 speaks specifically of manifest sin — that is, sin that is public and apparent.
Why does this matter? It’s not simply that the minister of Holy Communion has knowledge of the sin. I may have personal knowledge that someone has committed a grave sin but that still wouldn’t give me knowledge of their heart. But when someone is known to the community to be guilty of grave sin and is openly admitted to Communion, it creates scandal for the faithful. It suggests that either the sin in question is not really sinful, or that the Church really doesn’t believe what we teach about the Eucharist. Either conclusion is harmful to the faith of others. It is for the good of the faithful as well as the individual that Canon Law requires those guilty of manifest (public) grave sin not be admitted to Holy Communion.
Obstinate Sin
In addition to being grave and manifest, Canon Law stipulates a third requirement before a person is to be denied Holy Communion, and that is that they obstinately persist in their sin. That means the person has been corrected and yet continues to persist unrepentant in their sin.
I mean, really, the Church goes out of her way to avoid having to deny someone Holy Communion. Any member of the faithful who has basic knowledge of the sacraments and what it means to be properly disposed to receive the Eucharist (what should be taught in any second-grade faith formation class to seven-year-olds) should voluntarily refrain from receiving the Eucharist if they are conscious of having committed grave sin until they are able to receive the sacrament of reconciliation. But should someone not be that discerning about their own spiritual well-being, and should their sin be publicly known, the Church still says such a person deserves to be corrected and given the opportunity to repent and be reconciled with the Church before they are denied Communion. In other words, it’s a last resort.
President Biden and Pro-Abortion Politicians
Do Catholic politicians (especially prominent politicians like Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi) who publicly profess to be Catholics and publicly advocate for abortion meet the criteria as outlined above to be denied Holy Communion? Let’s look and see.
The Church clearly teaches that abortion is a grave sin.
Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law (Catechism of the Catholic Church 2271).
Further, guilt does not belong solely to the one procuring an abortion, but also to those who cooperate in the sin of abortion.
Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life (CCC 2272, cf. can. 1398).
“Formal cooperation” is a specific term used in Catholic moral theology to mean those who may not themselves commit the sin but who contribute in some way to the sin committed by others through their willing assent. So even though a politician such as President Biden may not themselves procure an abortion, by working to support others to do so, they share in the guilt of this grave sin.
In the case of public figures such as the president and other national politicians, this formal cooperation with sin is certainly publicly known.
It is also obstinately persistent. We may never know what has been said to Joe Biden by his bishop behind closed doors, but the president is an intelligent man and clearly aware of what the Church teaches on abortion. And it’s ridiculous to suggest that he’s not aware of the controversy over his continued reception of Holy Communion while advocating for this sin. It is clearly causing a scandal, as evidenced by the fact that the question of whether or not the president should be admitted to Holy Communion is now a matter of national news interest. And, I would add, it is also a scandal that our US bishops seem unwilling to speak with one voice about what to the average well-informed lay Catholic presents itself as a fairly straightforward issue.
Listen to what Cardinal Francis Arinze said on this issue back in 2008. He makes the point that we shouldn’t need cardinals and bishops to tell us what any child preparing for his or her First Holy Communion ought to know.
I will add that my own bishop, Peter Jugis, in 2004 as bishop of Charlotte co-signed a statement with the bishops of Charleston and Atlanta stating:
Catholic public officials who consistently support abortion on demand are cooperating with evil in a public manner. By supporting pro-abortion legislation they participate in manifest grave sin, a condition which excludes them from admission to Holy Communion as long as they persist in the pro-abortion stance… We declare that Catholics serving in public life espousing positions contrary to the teaching of the Church on the sanctity and inviolability of human life, especially those running for or elected to public office, are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in any Catholic church within our jurisdictions: the Archdiocese of Atlanta, the Dioceses of Charleston and Charlotte (CNA).
To the best of my knowledge, this policy remains in effect.
Politicizing the Eucharist?
Are those who would deny Communion to Catholic politicians who advocate for abortion guilty of “politicizing the Eucharist” as some have charged? Notice that none of the information I have just reviewed has anything to do with party politics. Instead, it has everything to do with maintaining the integrity of the sacramental theology of the Church and care for the good of souls, which falls squarely in the realm of religion and not politics.
Meanwhile, California Congressman Rep. Ted Lieu tweets on June 18, “Dear USCCB: I’m Catholic and I support: -Contraception -A woman’s right to choose -Treatments for infertility -The right for people to get a divorce -The right of same sex marriage. Next time I go to Church, I dare you to deny me Communion.”
In other words, modern Catholic politicians want to advocate for things the Catholic Church teaches are evil while presenting themselves as Catholics in good standing, brazenly daring the Church in the public forum to enforce her own discipline. Tell me again who is politicizing the Eucharist?
(And for the record, contra Mr. Lieu, the Catholic Church neither denies people the right to divorce, nor to receive morally appropriate infertility treatment).
Not a Prize for the Perfect
But what about the quote from the Holy Father that’s getting bandied about? You know the one I mean: “The Eucharist is not a prize for the perfect, but medicine for the weak.” It’s been turned into countless social media memes as this debate has roiled since Joe Biden’s inauguration. Is our Holy Father, contrary to the law of his own Church, saying it is wrong to ever deny anyone Communion?
Well, the pope has the power to change canon law if he chooses. And he has not chosen to do so. That means the above quote ought to be read in light of everything else the Church teaches about the reception of the Sacrament.
The source of the quote is Pope Francis’ 2013 Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (The Joy of the Gospel), where he wrote:
The Eucharist, although it is the fullness of sacramental life, is not a prize for the perfect but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak (Evangelii Gaudium, 47).
An Apostolic Exhortation is, by definition, an extended reflection and not a legal document. But, more to the point, nothing in this statement contradicts church law about Holy Communion. Nor is Pope Francis the first pope to say such things. Over 100 years earlier, Pope St. Pius X issued a decree about Holy Communion called Quam Singulari, in which he rebuked “the errors of the Jansenists who contended that the Most Holy Eucharist is a reward rather than a remedy for human frailty.”
Pope Pius X goes on to recall the teaching of the Council of Trent that the Eucharist is “an antidote for daily faults” that “preserves us from mortal sin,” and encouraged people to receive Communion frequently with only two conditions required: a state of grace and a right intention (Quam Singulari, 1910).
Pope St. Pius X and Pope Francis are both right in teaching that no one “earns” the Eucharist through good behavior. The Eucharist is not a prize for the perfect because none of us are perfect, at least not here on earth. But there is a wide gap between perfect holiness and mortal sin. Hence Pius X could say without contradiction that the Eucharist is a remedy for frailty and faults and that one must be in a state of grace to receive Holy Communion. Being in a state of grace is not equivalent to spiritual perfection. One can be in a state of grace, worthy to receive the Eucharist, and still struggle daily with sin. But the venial sins we commit due to human weakness are not contrary to the life of grace, and therefore do not cut us off from communion with God in the same way as mortal sins.
The Eucharist is not a prize. It is a gift. And herein lies the crux of the matter. The Eucharist is not a gift given to individual Christians by the Church. It is a gift given to the Church by Christ. If we want to participate in that gift, we must do so as members of the Church.
It’s a matter of integrity. Do you want to live in God’s grace? That’s what Christ offers in the Eucharist — his life of grace. Then live it! That means, among other things, trying your best to observe God’s law as taught by the Church and, at a minimum, avoiding mortal sin. If that’s not the life you want, then by all means, you do you. But don’t get in the Communion line. The Eucharist isn’t about doing whatever you want. It’s about participating in the life of Christ and His Church.
You cannot receive the Blood of Christ unless you belong to His Body. You cannot receive the Body of Christ unless you belong to His Bride. When Jesus says at the Last Supper, “This is my body which is given up for you,” it is a marriage proposal. If we want to dine at the wedding banquet of the Eucharist, we all must assent to the Bridegroom’s proposal. It’s why we say “Amen” as we receive. That “Amen” is our “I do.”
