1 May 1983

Your Excellency,

We are writing to you on a matter of the utmost gravity. Indeed, it could hardly be more grave as it involves the worst of all forms of sacrilege, irreverence to the Holy Eucharist. We are referring to the widespread practice within the U.S.A. of what is known as "Eucharistic hospitality" to Protestants, i.e. allowing Protestants to receive Holy Communion from a Catholic priest. We shall show you how the legislation of the Holy See regulating this concession is defied in a number of American dioceses, and ask you to use your authority to curtail this grave abuse. But this will be the subject of a subsequent letter.

In this letter we wish to put before Your Grace our firm conviction that such a concession should never have been made by the Holy See, and our belief that allowing a Protestant to receive Catholic Holy Communion contradicts the very nature of the Sacrament. Such a concession repudiates our entire Catholic tradition concerning the Eucharist, a tradition manifested not simply in the teaching of the Fathers, the Popes, and the great theologians, but in the unbroken practice of the Church which has always denied Holy Communion to heretics.

The Holy Eucharist is designated the Sacrament of Unity, and rightly so; because the Eucharist is the Sacrament of Unity, giving it to those outside the visible unity of the Church violates this fundamental principle. In his encyclical Mirae Caritatis (28 May 1902), Pope Leo XIII commented:

On this subject St. Cyprian writes: "Finally, this sacrifice of the Lord in itself affirms the universal union of Christians among themselves by form and indissoluble charity. For when the Lord called His Body the bread made up of many grains, He indicates the union of Our people; and when He calls His Blood the wine made out of thousands of grapes and forming one single liquid, He also designates Our flock formed out of a multitude of different men together."

This passage is an admirable explanation of the ultimate end for which the Eucharist was instituted, not simply the union of the individual members of the Mystical Body with Christ, the Head of the Body, but the unity of the members of the Body among themselves as well as their Head. It conforms perfectly to the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas that the Sacrament of the Eucharist signifies the unity of the Church, which is the Mystical Body of Christ, to which everyone who would be saved must belong. (Summa Theologica, III, Q. LXIII, art. 3.).

In a message to the 9th National Eucharistic Congress of the United States in 1941, Pope Pius XII developed this aspect of the Eucharist on an even more profound level by quoting St. John Chrysostom:

For what is the Bread? The Body of Christ. And what do they become who receive It? The Body of Christ; not many bodies but one Body.

St. John Chrysostom, then, teaches that those who receive the Eucharist become what they receive, the Body of Christ which is the Church. But a Protestant who insists upon remaining outside the unity of the Mystical Body, no matter how sincere he may be, cannot become what he receives. St. Cyprian taught that the Eucharistic sacrifice affirms the universal union of Christians among themselves, but by remaining outside the unity of the Church a Protestant denies this universal union. St. Thomas Aquinas points out, quoting St. Augustine, that the Mass may only be offered (licitly) by members of the Mystical Body for members of that Body, and that in the Canon of the Mass we do not pray for those who are outside the Church (S.T. III, Q. LXXIX, art. 7). The Christian sacrifice is, wrote St. Augustine, "continually celebrated in the Sacrament of the altar well known to the faithful, in which it is made clear to her that in her offering she herself is offered to God" (City of God, X, vi). The Mass is, then, Christ offering Himself together with His Church, the sacrifice of the Mystical Body, Head and members. Evidently, as those outside the Mystical Body and excluded from offering the Sacrifice they are excluded from receiving the Sacrament.

We are aware that, today, there are those claiming to be Catholics who repudiate the teaching of the Magisterium on membership of the Church. They adhere to the theory condemned by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, that the Church is composed of the various Christian communities linked by some sort of invisible bond. We are confident that Your Excellency is no less loyal to the Pontifical Magisterium than we are, and that you fully accept the traditional teaching that the Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ. We are certain that you will agree that the teaching of the Letter Jam vos omnes, convoking the First Vatican Council, is as valid and binding today as when Pope Pius IX wrote it in 1868:

Now, anyone who wishes to examine with care and to meditate on the condition of the different religious societies divided among themselves and separated from the Catholic Church, who, since the time of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Apostles, has always exercised by her legitimate pastors, and still exercises today, the divine power which was given to her by the same Lord, will easily be convinced that not one of these societies, nor all of them together, in any way constitute or are that one Catholic Church which Our Lord founded and established and which He willed to create. Nor is it possible, either, to say that these societies are either a member or a part of this same Church, since they are visibly separated from Catholic unity.

Your Grace will certainly be aware that some Catholics, blinded by a false concept of ecumenism, are claiming that, as every baptised person is baptised into the Catholic Church, Protestants therefore belong to the Church. It is true that every baptism is a baptism into the Church, but the baptised person no longer remains within the Church after he gives his voluntary adherence to membership of a Protestant sect. Thus an infant who is baptized remains a Catholic until, after reaching the age of reason, he makes a conscious decision to adhere to the sect to which his parents belong. Obviously, such persons are almost invariably in good faith, they are the victims of invincible ignorance, material, not formal heretics, and do not incur sin by their heresy. They are, as Pope Pius XII taught in his encyclical The Mystical Body of Christ, often "related to the Mystical Body of the redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning or desire." These people are, he teaches, by no means excluded from eternal salvation, but, on the other hand, they are in a condition "in which they cannot be sure of their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church." The dogma that outside the Church there is no salvation is, as was explained in the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston (8 August 1949), to be understood as referring only to those who are aware of the divine foundation of the Catholic Church and deliberately remain outside her visible boundaries:

Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ.

In his encyclical on the Mystical Body Pope Pius XII specifically condemned the opinion that every baptised person is a member of the Body simply in virtue of His baptism:

In the Church they alone are to be counted as members who have received the baptism of regeneration and profess the true faith, who, moreover, have not had the misfortune to separate themselves from the assembly of the Body, or been excommunicated by legitimate authority by reason of very great faults ... they who are divided by reasons of faith or of government cannot live in this one Body, and in its one Divine Spirit.

In this encyclical the Pope teaches, of course, that the terms Catholic Church and Mystical Body of Jesus Christ are synonymous. The Mystical Body is not some sort of amorphous entity which transcends the boundaries of the one visible Church subject to the Roman Pontiff.

We hope that what we have written so far will be adequate to indicate to Your Grace the dilemma posed by the admission of a Protestant to Catholic Holy Communion under any circumstances. The Eucharist signifies and builds up the unity of the Mystical Body, and, therefore, to admit anyone to It who remains deliberately outside that visible unity contradicts the very nature of the Eucharist. The entire Tradition of the Church testifies to the truth of this observation.

It might help Your Grace if we reminded you of the manner in which this startling breach with Tradition came about. It is quite possible that you have never examined the documents yourself. Since the Council a veritable deluge of documents regulating the liturgy and related matters has poured out from the Vatican, well over two hundred by now. In view of the time-consuming nature of your work in the diplomatic service of the Holy See you have probably had the opportunity of reading only a fraction of this staggering total. We hope that you will find the following resumé useful.

In 1967 the Secretariat for the Promotion of the Unity of Christians published an Ecumenical Directory. In this Directory it was stated that for "adequate reasons" the separated brethren could be allowed access to the sacraments. The reasons and conditions were explained as follows:

This may be permitted in danger of death or in urgent need (during persecution, in prisons) if the separated brethren has no access to a minister of his own communion, and spontaneously asks a Catholic priest for the sacraments—so long as he declares a faith in these sacraments in harmony with that of the Church, and is rightly disposed. In other cases the judge of this urgent necessity must be the diocesan bishop or episcopal conference.

It is evident that a protestant could never have a faith in the Eucharist in conformity to that of the Church. This is generally interpreted as meaning that he should believe in the Real Presence, but for a faith in harmony with that of the Church he would have to accept that the Eucharist signifies the unity of the Mystical Body, and if he believed this he would wish to be admitted to the Church. It is also evident that this concession is totally open ended. It purports to impose restrictions—urgent need, prison, danger of death—but then allows bishops to extend the concession to "other cases." What could possibly be more vague, and, we feel bound to ask, scandalously irresponsible? But our complaints concerning the Unity Secretariat do not end here. We consider that it has justified this breach with immemorial tradition by an act of misrepresentation amounting to outright falsehood. This is a very serious charge; but the evidence is open to no other interpretation. The Directory cites as its authority for admitting Protestants to the Sacraments of the Catholic Church, the Decree on Ecumenism of the Second Vatican Council. It even cites the section of the Decree which is supposed to make this concession, i.e. No. 8. Your Grace, there is not one word in this section or anywhere else in the Decree even hinting that Protestants should be allowed to receive Holy Communion from a Catholic priest. There is not one word alluding even remotely to the sacraments in this passage which refers to prayer in common, stating that although the expression of unity very generally forbids it there are certain circumstances when Catholics can join in prayer with their separated brethren.

During the course of this letter we shall be referring to subsequent legislation on the question of "Eucharistic hospitality." This legislation cites the Ecumenical Directory as its authority, but, as we have just shown you, the authorization given in this Directory is based on a totally false premise, i.e., that Eucharistic hospitality for Protestants was authorized by the decree on Ecumenism of Vatican II. We are thus faced with a situation where the Secretariat of Christian Unity has taken it upon itself to repudiate a tradition of 2000 years standing, and to contradict the nature of the Eucharist by allowing Protestants to receive It. Not surprisingly, the publication of the Directory was followed in some places by the virtually indiscriminate admission of Protestants to Holy Communion by ecumenically-minded priests, and the scandal was so great that in 1972 the Secretariat was obliged to publish an Instruction entitled In quibus verum circumstantiis, in an attempt to curtail the abuses. The Instruction stated, referring to offering Eucharistic hospitality to Protestants,

The question is not a new one. The Second Vatican Council (in the Decree on Ecumenism) and the Ecumenical Directory deal with it.

This, of course, is a repetition of the falsehood contained in the Directory.

It is evident that in this Instruction the Secretariat was uneasy about the doctrinal basis of the concession. Several statements accepting the Eucharist as the Sacrament of Unity were included, among them the following:

The strict relationship between the mystery of the Church and the mystery of the Eucharist can never be altered, whatever pastoral measures we may be led to take in given cases. Of its very nature, celebration of the Eucharist signifies the fullness of profession of faith and the fullness of ecclesial communion. This principle must not be obscured, and must remain our guide in this field.

Your Excellency, this is precisely the point which we have been attempting to convey to you in this letter. It would appear then, that there is no dispute concerning the principle which is at stake. But the Secretariat then continues with a statement so outrageous that it almost defies credibility:

The principle will not be obscured if admission to Catholic eucharistic communion is confined to particular cases of those Christians who have a faith in the sacrament in conformity to that of the Church, who experience a very serious spiritual need for eucharistic sustenance, who for a prolonged period are unable to have recourse to a minister of their own community, and who ask for the sacrament of their own accord; all this provided they have proper dispositions and lead lives worth of a Christian.

We hardly need to point out that this is a purely gratuitous affirmation. The Secretariat first accepts the principle that reception of the Eucharist to Protestants in particular cases does not obscure that principle. It makes no attempt to explain why, and this is not surprising as it could not possibly do so. If a Protestant could ever be given Holy Communion legitimately by a Catholic priest then the principle would be a false one. Either the Eucharist signifies the unity of the Mystical Body, in which case those outside its unity must be excluded, or it does not. We might add that if the conditions laid down in (2) above are applicable, then we should always permit Protestants to receive Holy Communion in our churches because they can never receive true eucharistic sustenance from their own ministers, as these ministers do not have valid priestly ordination and hence cannot consecrate. We would also add that no Protestant is ever excluded from receiving Holy Communion in a Catholic church, or would we wish him to be. All he needs to do is to take the step taken by countless other Protestants, from St. Edmund Campion to Cardinal Newman, and join the one true Church where, as a member of the Mystical Body, he can, each time he receives Communion, become ever more truly what he receives—the Body of Christ.

We would, therefore, beg your Excellency to convey this letter to the Holy Father, and with it our urgent request that he will immediately bring an end to the abuse of Eucharistic hospitality for Protestants anywhere, at any time, under any circumstances, and for any reason. In other reasons, we beg him to return to Tradition.

In our next letter to you we shall deal with the manner in which the current legislation of the Holy Communion is defied in the U.S.A.

Your Excellency may have noted that we have made no reference to members of the Orthodox Church in this letter. This has been for two reasons, firstly it would involve a discussion of the status of the Orthodox churches, which would be very lengthy, and, secondly, the question does not arise because the Orthodox Bishops in the United Statement rejected in very forceful terms the Catholic offer of reciprocal Eucharistic hospitality. In the case of the Protestant sects the offer was not reciprocal, and Catholics are not permitted to receive Holy Communion from Protestant ministers. In May 1973, the Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the United States stated their position with admirable clarity, and it is the very position which the Holy See had always maintained until 1967. They believe that the Orthodox Church is the true Church, that Catholics are in schism, and that to receive Communion from our priests, or to allow us to receive Communion from theirs, contradicts the nature of the sacrament. The Orthodox Bishops insisted that: "unity in faith and the active life of the community is a necessary precondition to sharing the Sacraments of the Orthodox Church." They teach that the Eucharistic Mystery is the end of unity, not a means to that end, and that: "the decisions regarding Holy Communion reached by bodies outside the Orthodox will have no significance or validity for the Orthodox Church or her members. Holy Communion will not be sought by Orthodox Christians outside the Church, nor will it be offered to those who do not yet confess the Orthodox as their mother."

Your Excellency, if we substitute the title "Catholic Church" for "Orthodox Church" this is exactly the statement we hope Pope John Paul II will make, and thus conform the practice of the Catholic Church to immemorial Tradition.

We remain, Your Grace, your obedient servants.

The Editors

The Most Reverend Pio Laghi
The Apostolic Delegation
3339 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20008