Could Frequent Reception encouragement be changed?

[ConstantineTG]

And I might add, we know from the Divine Mercy diary that when unworthy souls receive the Eucharist, it causes Jesus pain. He said so. The more it makes you wanna snatch it out of unworthy hands.

The Eucharist is about God first, then about us (like with pretty much anything else).

I find this hard to believe. How can an all-powerful God be hurt by mortals? Darkness never conquers light. Where there is light, you cannot introduce darkness. So how can God be affected by sins of man?

Unless we’re talking about a metaphorical pain and not an actual one.

 

[Rejoice_Always]

I find this hard to believe. How can an all-powerful God be hurt by mortals? Darkness never conquers light. Where there is light, you cannot introduce darkness. So how can God be affected by sins of man?

Unless we’re talking about a metaphorical pain and not an actual one.

Maybe it is possible that the Divine Mercy diary isn’t de fide?

 

[OraLabora]

So we went from receiving rarely to receiving frequently and the pendulum may be changing again as people become more aware of what it means to prepare for communion.

I hope that the encouragement to frequently receive communion also encourages us to frequently seek out the sacrament of reconciliation rather than have the need for reconciliation discourage communion!

 

[PazzoGrande]

I hope that the encouragement to frequently receive communion also encourages us to frequently seek out the sacrament of reconciliation rather than have the need for reconciliation discourage communion!

But unfortunately and ironically, we have a situation where people who should be going to Confession don’t go, and people who shouldn’t be going to the Communion line do go. Sad but true.

 

[OraLabora]

But unfortunately and ironically, we have a situation where people who should be going to Confession don’t go, and people who shouldn’t be going to the Communion line do go. Sad but true.

We’re human. What can I say?

Perhaps it’s best to just focus on your own conversion and worthiness and let God and prayer take care of everyone else.

I found in my case it was far less frustrating and actually helped my inner conversion whereas worrying about others harms it.

 

[Rejoice_Always]

Perhaps it’s best to just focus on your own conversion and worthiness and let God and prayer take care of everyone else.

I am commanded to love my neighbor. And that must include my neighbor’s speck-filled eye, right?

 

[Digitonomy]

Is it possible that the encouragement for frequent Eucharist could be changed? Perhaps during Pius X’s time it was good for the Church, but one could argue that it isn’t so today.

I have periodically placed Pope St. Pius X at the root of the current practice we observe. I agree that his bold encouragement was incautious, and a more limited expansion of practice at the time would have better served the Church.

 

[Beachcomber]

I always thought that frequent reception was a good thing. Just because some people take communion who shouldn’t be, shouldn’t really be the concern of others. As someone previously mentioned, leave this sort thing to God and worry about your own state of grace.

 

[Contarini]

Receiving communion frequently but sinfully doesn’t accomplish anything. Is the mortal sin of profaning the eucharist “cancelled out” by the grace of the Eucharist? I think not.

Don’t you need “full knowledge and deliberate consent” for mortal sin?

 

[KCT]

I don’t think the Church is going to restrict our access to the grace of Holy Communion.

 

[Rhuarc]

Is it possible that the encouragement for frequent Eucharist could be changed? Perhaps during Pius X’s time it was good for the Church, but one could argue that it isn’t so today. Today everybody receives it even though so many of them really shouldn’t (civilly remarried people for example). As a result, I feel as if people don’t appreciate it the way they should.

I’ve read of tourists from Japan who’d go to the Vatican and attend Mass, take the Eucharist and not understand what it is. Once when I was at a weekday Mass, some woman went to receive it and pocketed it. A sister noticed it and took the Host back. Another time, I was in college and Lutheran professor I know attended Mass and received the Eucharist. I spoke about it with him later and he didn’t feel like he was in the wrong at all; I could prove it with Canon Law but that wouldn’t have made a difference to him. People end up thinking it’s being passed out like candy. I’m sure a lot of you have at least one story where you know the Eucharist was profaned. I can think of two more off the top of my head but I don’t even want to mention them here, they were so disgusting.

In the history of the Church, have there been waves of encouragement then discouragement of frequent Eucharist? Can the trend of frequent reception be reversed? At one time even nuns needed special permission to take the Eucharist daily. Nowadays everyone takes it for granted.

I imagine it would be exceedingly difficult to enforce a change in the rules. But is it possible that the rules could be changed? Has such a thing happened in the past?

Perhaps we should all be given a kind of Eucharist token to show to the ministers. Or perhaps have them recite the creed before receiving.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Maybe it is possible that the Divine Mercy diary isn’t de fide?

Maybe I am just misinterpreting what is being said.

 

[thistle]

Spanish people don’t all go to receive? That’s interesting. Do you find that the more Catholic the culture, the more they know not to receive it when they shouldn’t? I noticed that in the Philippines they don’t all go, yet in the US they all do.

Here in the Philippines almost everyone at Mass goes up for Communion. Our priests from time to time during a homily mention that its strange to see the Confession line so short but the Communion line so long!

 

[Vico]

To me, it seems that the encouragement of frequent reception of Eucharist goes hand-in-glove with a frequent reception of Reconciliation. It is perhaps a combination of encouragement of frequent communion and a lack of catechesis about mortal sin and confession that leads many Catholics in the modern world to commit sacrilege regularly. There is little we can do about treatment of the Eucharist by non-Catholics. They will always be ignorant of Church culture and teachings. However, we can help by encouraging others to avoid sin, and to frequent the confessional. We can gently admonish people who receive unworthily. It primarily is up to our bishops and priests to get the word out and to ensure proper celebration of the sacraments so that the whole cycle can be observed faithfully by a greater number of people.

Me too. The subtlety is that it is not the objective sin only that makes a sin mortal, but the willing and knowing act which lacks charity. This means that, lacking catechesis about mortal sin, some may not be actually committing mortal sins so do not receive sacrilegiously, similarly to the way those under the age of reason do not sin gravely. Yet some do lack charity because they willingly do not seek proper catechesis.

CCC 1735, 1746, 1859, 2094.

*1735 Imputability *and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.

1746 The imputability or responsibility for an action can be diminished or nullified by ignorance, duress, fear, and other psychological or social factors.

1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart (133) do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin. 133 Cf. Mk 3:5-6; Lk 16:19-31.

2094 One can sin against God’s love in various ways:

• *indifference *neglects or refuses to reflect on divine charity; it fails to consider its prevenient goodness and denies its power.
• *ingratitude *fails or refuses to acknowledge divine charity and to return him love for love.
• *lukewarmness *is hesitation or negligence in responding to divine love; it can imply refusal to give oneself over to the prompting of charity.
• *acedia *or spiritual sloth goes so far as to refuse the joy that comes from God and to be repelled by divine goodness.
• hatred of God comes from pride. It is contrary to love of God, whose goodness it denies, and whom it presumes to curse as the one who forbids sins and inflicts punishments.

 

[TrueLight]

I hope that the encouragement to frequently receive communion also encourages us to frequently seek out the sacrament of reconciliation rather than have the need for reconciliation discourage communion!

Don’t get me wrong! I’m not against frequent communion. In fact 90% of the time that I’m at mass, I receive. But I think it’s important that people don’t feel pressured to receive if they are not properly disposed.

 

[Stylites]

I imagine it would be exceedingly difficult to enforce a change in the rules. But is it possible that the rules could be changed? Has such a thing happened in the past?

“Vanity of vanities, said Ecclesiastes vanity of vanities, and all is vanity.”

 

[Nigel7]

Is it possible that the encouragement for frequent Eucharist could be changed? Perhaps during Pius X’s time it was good for the Church, but one could argue that it isn’t so today. Today everybody receives it even though so many of them really shouldn’t (civilly remarried people for example). As a result, I feel as if people don’t appreciate it the way they should.

People need to be better educated in how to receive properly (i.e. in a state of grace, free from mortal sin), not discouraged from receiving frequently.

 

[PazzoGrande]

Perhaps we should all be given a kind of Eucharist token to show to the ministers. Or perhaps have them recite the creed before receiving.

Giving me a sarcastic answer is disrespectful, doesn’t add to the conversation and is useless.

 

[PazzoGrande]

I always thought that frequent reception was a good thing. Just because some people take communion who shouldn’t be, shouldn’t really be the concern of others. As someone previously mentioned, leave this sort thing to God and worry about your own state of grace.

I tried looking at it from that side, but like I noted from Divine Mercy, it hurts Jesus every time that happens. So when I see the Eucharist abused, I feel I’m failing Christ.

I can give you a story that will leave you shocked. This was a case where I really feel like I failed. Yet if I went back in time, I still don’t know what I even could have done differently.

I had a relative who was on his deathbead. He managed to get a priest to give him some consecrated Hosts. I’m sure it was the real Eucharist from a real Catholic priest because I know he was scrupulous about that sort of thing (his deceased brother headed a counterfeit “Catholic” church and those pseudo-catholic groups were a source of jokes for us; I think the priest just did as my relative wanted because at one time my relative was a powerful doctor – betcha Thistle can tell you this isn’t unimaginable, it having happened in the Philippines). He kept it on a pyx worn from his neck under his clothes.

After he died, his wife suggested they put the Host in the corpse’s mouth. I told them they can’t do that. I left the room to help make arrangements for the body. When I returned, I discovered that they put the Host in the body’s mouth anyway, clearly waiting till I was gone so they could sneak it on. The body spent the night in the freezer then went to the crematorium anyway.

Okay look at this, how many abuses did we see?
-Even the Pope doesn’t keep the Eucharist on him
-Even if that relative of mine went to church, he shouldn’t be receiving anyway because he’s on his third wife, whom he civilly married after he divorced the first two
-The Eucharist is for the living, not corpses. I remembered in Divine Mercy where Jesus spoke of how lukewarm souls give Him loathing like corpses. How much more loathsome must this experience be?

See, look at this case. It’s such a grave abuse of the Sacrament that if I feel like I ignore it, I’m committing wrong too. Although looking back, I really don’t even know what I could have done. I spoke up and that was good, but I don’t know if I could (or even should) have went to the corpse’s mouth to take it back.

Here’s another case. Someone was selling a host on eBay that he claimed to get from the funeral of John Paul II (or something John Paul II-related; I don’t remember exactly what, but some of you remember this I’m sure). Let’s say that I was standing next to him when I saw him pocket it. Can I really just say it’s his own problem? Wouldn’t I be obligated to go to him and ask for it back?

There really are gross abuses. Granted these are on the more extreme side (and I’m sure there are those of you with even worse stories), but they really do happen. Knowing that this hurts Christ makes it impossible to ignore and makes me wonder if we’re at fault too if we don’t do anything about it.

So in going with this thinking, I would say that it actually does harm your own soul when you don’t step in.

 

[CB_Catholic]

I get rather irritated when I read threads like this, because the person starting them assumes the worst of others who receive too frequently in their estimation, but somehow does not appear to consider him/herself among those not worthy to receive, or if he does, manages to tell the forums how he/she is pious enough to not receive when they are not worthy. That stinks.

People need to mind their own business. We know disrespectful things happen, there is no way to always prevent them, but judging a whole church full of people as probably receiving unworthily because they are probably sinning and not confessing is not one of them; and suggesting that frequent Communion be denied to people on the basis that “I” think people are receiving too frequently because they are probably unworthy, isn’t either.

There is not a person here who has the wisdom of the Church and the Magesterium and is qualified to suggest the teaching be changed.