I'm would imagine that Communion would be a thing in pretty much all denominations, not just Catholic.
Yes, but that's not the issue. As I already commented, for Roman Catholics, the doctrine of transubstantiation means that once the wafers have been consecrated, they literally ARE the body of Christ, and the wine literally IS the blood of Christ. The Eastern Orthodox belief is very close, but they prefer to refer to it as a "mystery" as to exactly when and how the bread and the wine become the body and blood of Christ.
The there's "consubstantiation," which is more or less what the Lutherans and Anglicans believe. While not saying that the bread and wine literally become the body and blood of Christ, they believe that Christ is present in them after consecration.
Although I was christened (baptized) as an Episcopalian, there wasn't an Episcopal church in the town where I grew up so my family attended a Congregational church. (New England Protestant, like the Puritans.) We had communion, but for the Congregational church there was no transubstantiation or consubstantiation. Rather than emphasizing the "And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said,
Take, eat; this is my body," the Congregational church (and many other Protestant denominations) focuses on "Do this in remembrance of me." They don't believe that the bread and wine (or grape juice, which is what we had) literally become the body and blood of Christ, they celebrate communion in remembrance of Jesus' sacrifice of Himself to save us.
So it's not a matter of "Communion would be a thing in pretty much all denominations, not just Catholic.
" It's a question of the significance of the Eucharist. For a Roman Catholic, wafers that have been consecrated ARE the body of Christ, so it's not surprising that a priest would try to save them before trying to save anything else.