Different rules for different Catholics?

[Critter]

Receiving Communion is not the whole point of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The re-presentation of the sacrifice, us being at the Calvary while Jesus dies to wash away the sins of the world is the point of the Mass. The precept of the Church says to attend Mass every Sunday, while we have the obligation of receiving communion only once a year during the Easter season.

Thank you for the correction, but that doesn’t answer my question.

Anyone else???

 

[Woodstock]

This question is directed to Latin Rite Catholics with young children:

I think we all agree that both Eastern and Western Rites are perfectly and equally valid, and that “diversity has its good points.” However, given the choice between the two Rites, why have you chosen the one that prohibits young children from receiving the Eucharist, which, if I’m not mistaken is the whole point of the Mass?

(can i confess that I have a practical and semi-selfish reason for asking? There are at least seven Latin Rite parishes within 5 miles of our house, while the nearest Eastern Rite parish is a bit of drive away, and in a not-so-nice neighborhood. However, unless there’s a darn good reason not to, I’d be happy to drive as far as necessary to allow my children to receive the Body and Blood of their Savior)

While I am an Eastern Catholic, I have some possible reasons you would join the Latin Church over an Eastern Catholic Church.

• The Western theology and spirituality resonates with you, meaning you will be living and worshiping as a whole with all of the interconnected pieces fitting together neatly.
• The Eastern parishes available to you do not provide the liturgical, educational, spiritual, or social activities your family needs while the Latin parishes do.
• The Eastern parishes available to you are highly Latinized so that the theology and spirituality do not interconnect.
• Your spouse and/or children are western in their worldview and/or theology and do not identify as Eastern.
• You do not want to place the extra responsibilities that come with being an Eastern Catholic (like fasting, being an Eastern cleric, finding an Eastern parish) on your children.
• You will be living in a western world with western devotions and spirituality and books and people and the western church will complete that picture for your children and help them to take their faith into their adult lives.
• You want to be very active in the church and there nearly every day and that isn’t feasible with the distance you’d have to drive or with the Eastern parish’s schedule.
• After prayer and discernment, God leads you to the Latin Church.
  These are just a few reasons I can think of off the top of my head. The Eucharist isn’t the only thing that is different and the other responsibilities and privileges and burdens that come with a Church need to be viewed as a whole when deciding between them.

 

[Allyson]

Am I mistaken or is the Eucharist more than simply a “very impotant” or “high point” of the Mass?
My understanding is that it is the very center of the Mass; that it is the whole reason for going to Mass in the first place. Am I wrong?

You are not mistaken. I am sorry if my words were not clear, so to clarify:

I usually would read “high point” as “center.” That is, they are two ways of saying the same thing; high point indicates that the Eucharist is the focus, it is the center - whether you simply adore during the liturgy or you receive. And when I said “very important” I meant it!, and not in the nonchalant sense.

So really I said nothing that would contradict what you already understand. I am not sure how I would have?

God Bless,
Rosemary

 

[theistgal]

Am I mistaken or is the Eucharist more than simply a “very impotant” or “high point” of the Mass?
My understanding is that it is the very center of the Mass; that it is the whole reason for going to Mass in the first place. Am I wrong?

Actually, yes, you may be wrong about that. The whole reason for going to Mass in the first place is to offer God the highest possible form of worship we have available, which is indeed the Eucharist.

However, you can offer this without receiving the Eucharist. Many people do; in fact, many people who go to Mass are unable, for one reason or another, to receive the Eucharist. Yet they still go. Why?

 

[Deacon_Lance]

Receiving Communion is not the whole point of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The re-presentation of the sacrifice, us being at the Calvary while Jesus dies to wash away the sins of the world is the point of the Mass. The precept of the Church says to attend Mass every Sunday, while we have the obligation of receiving communion only once a year during the Easter season.

Not correct. The entire Mass/Liturgy and receiving the Eucharist is the point. The early Church did not even consider that someone would come to Liturgy and not receive it was considered a scandal to not receive if not prohibited. If one could not receive because of censure, you were expelled with the catechumens.

Fr. Deacon Lance

 

[Brendan]

I understand what you are saying (I received first communion at age 8 and was confirmed in the eigth grade as a Latin Catholic).

But I do not agree that the child should wait–for any reason. There should not be an “age of reason” qualifier for the reception of the Precious Gifts and chrismation. They are the Mysteries of initiation and it is a beautiful thing when the baby receives them all at once.

If an infant recieves Baptism alone, do you consider them to be lacking in Grace?

In other words, Does God hold back anything in Baptism that is necessary for the infant to achieve Salvation?

 

[Brendan]

Not correct. The entire Mass/Liturgy and receiving the Eucharist is the point. The early Church did not even consider that someone would come to Liturgy and not receive it was considered a scandal to not receive if not prohibited. If one could not receive because of censure, you were expelled with the catechumens.

Fr. Deacon Lance

I agree, they should recieve unless prohibited from doing so. Every Latin from every century would agree too

 

[scapularkid8]

As a non-Catholic (but one who is interested in learning more), I find it difficult to understand why different rites, rules, and rubrics apply differently to different Catholics. Don’t eastern and western Catholics all hold an equally valid membership in the church?
It’s troubling to me that one segment of the Church is denied a sacrament (specifically and especially the Blessed Sacrament!) while another segment is allowed to partake (in the case of infant communion with the ECC.)
Same goes for married/celebate priests.

And while we’re at it, I understand that the Eastern Catholics recite the Nicene Creed without the filioque!

Can someone please explain to me why this is okay?
Thanks.

(This question was originally submitted to: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=229178&page=2)

Hi! Welcome!
I didn’t read all of the previous posts (sorry if I’m introducing a broken record), but just responding to what you wrote:

The reason there are different “rules” for different Catholics is because of tradition. The beauty of the Catholic Church is that it’s just that: Catholic, which is the Greek word for universal (not trying to patronize, just clarifying). I as a Latin certainly do not care one bit that the Eastern Catholic priests may marry or infants receive Communion or that they omit the filioque…not that I disregard their importance, rather I just figure if that’s how the do it, let it be. Amen. What a beautiful and unique way to praise God in the exact same way I do, but from a different approach.

Yes I might think they are strange, but that’s just because I don’t, and might not ever, be able to fully grasp why they do what they do, just like they might never be able to fully grasp why Latin priests cannot marry for example.

The other point that must be highlighted is that we do not see these as “rules”. We don’t approach them from a legal or Sanhedrin point of view where “this is this no question”. Rather, we embrace our practices as they are and are overjoyed to worship God with them how they have always existed. The “rules” are merely a text format set forth for preservation and respect of orthodoxy (little “o”…just to avoid confusion!!).

Hope this helps! I too find the differences between the churches within the Catholic Church absolutely fascinating. That’s why I’m Catholic!!! It’s the most diverse yet beautifully unified religion on Earth!
God Bless.

 

[Cristiano]

Not correct. The entire Mass/Liturgy and receiving the Eucharist is the point. The early Church did not even consider that someone would come to Liturgy and not receive it was considered a scandal to not receive if not prohibited. If one could not receive because of censure, you were expelled with the catechumens.

Fr. Deacon Lance

I agree, they should recieve unless prohibited from doing so. Every Latin from every century would agree too

While I agree with both of you on what I think it should be done, I also look at the priorities that appear to be set through the precepts of the Church. It is evident that there is not requirement to receive more than once a year even if predisposed to.

 

[a_pilgrim]

I as a Latin certainly do not care one bit that the Eastern Catholic priests may marry…

Eastern Catholic priests may NOT marry (NO Catholic priests may marry). However, married Eastern Catholic men may be ordained to the priesthood.

BIG difference! …and an apparent source of ongoing confusion and misinformation.

 

[Mickey]

If an infant recieves Baptism alone, do you consider them to be lacking in Grace?

In other words, Does God hold back anything in Baptism that is necessary for the infant to achieve Salvation?

I have said nothing to disaparage baptism. I have indicated that I feel the Mysteries of initiation should be administered in conjunction to an infant. That is all.

 

[chrisb]

I have said nothing to disaparage baptism. I have indicated that I feel the Mysteries of initiation should be administered in conjunction to an infant. That is all.

If I may humbly say I tend to agree with Mickey on this. I entered into the Western Church as an adult through Baptism, Confirmation (Chrismation) and First Communion. My daughter entered into the Western Church just last weekend, God be Praised, through Baptism and the anointing of chrism. I wondered to myself how much she might have been strengthen in grace if she too could have partook of our Lord and Saviour’s Body and Blood? Surely it would have fulfilled her desire to be ‘complete’. Knowing that she was anointed with the Oil of Chrism I wonder exactly what ‘is’ Confirmation if she and the infants have already been anointed with the Holy Oils. I also understand that our brothers and sisters in Orthodoxy allow children to partake of the Most Blessed Sacrament even before First Confession. I wonder though how do they determine when their children should not partake of the Most Blessed Sacrament due to sin before First Confession. Do they just all of the sudden tell the child ‘after’ this day you must confession before partaking of the Blessed Sacrament? Is it confusing to them? Very curious.

 

[Mickey]

If I may humbly say I tend to agree with Mickey on this.

You are free to disagree with me and the Orthodox Church and the Eastern Catholics.

Our children grow in the faith and learn from the Church and their parents. Young children are innocent and do not need to confess. But they are taught about confession and they are prepared when it is time for them to participate in this Mystery. I can tell you that my toddler knows she is receiving Jesus Christ and I am thankful to be a part of a Tradition which encourages reception of the Most Holy Eucharist from the time of baptism onward.

Peace

 

[Woodstock]

I am thankful to be a part of a Tradition which encourages reception of the Most Holy Eucharist from the time of baptism onward.

I’ve found this wording to be confusing for westerners, so I hope you don’t mind my clarifying that it is from the time of Chrismation onward. An Orthodox child who, for whatever strange reason, was only baptized would be chrismated first before being communed. On this point, east and west agree completely. The difference is at what time the Confirmation/Chrismation is done in the child’s life.

I am thankful to be a part of a tradition which encourages reception of Chrismation, and therefore also of the Most Holy Eucharist, from the time of baptism onward.

 

[chrisb]

You are free to disagree with me and the Orthodox Church and the Eastern Catholics.

Not on this one…

Our children grow in the faith and learn from the Church and their parents. Young children are innocent and do not need to confess. But they are taught about confession and they are prepared when it is time for them to participate in this Mystery. I can tell you that my toddler knows she is receiving Jesus Christ and I am thankful to be a part of a Tradition which encourages reception of the Most Holy Eucharist from the time of baptism onward.

I have been taught that young children are innocent from the guilt of error due to a lack of knowledge of sin. Do the Orthodox teach that children are sinless as in they are virtuous? My daughter has not done much that I consider ‘grave’ but she can do very selfish things but I was wondering if the Orthodox taught this differently? Also when it comes time to do their First Confession do they just ‘start’ confessing their sins yet a day, a week, a month before they didn’t and still partook of the Blessed Sacrament? I’m just trying to understand how this isn’t confusing to the child…

 

[Mickey]

My daughter has not done much that I consider ‘grave’ but she can do very selfish things but I was wondering if the Orthodox taught this differently?

Do you consider this selfishness to be intentional?

Also when it comes time to do their First Confession do they just ‘start’ confessing their sins yet a day, a week, a month before they didn’t and still partook of the Blessed Sacrament?

I do not understand what you are saying here. Your sentence structure is confusing to me.

 

[Mickey]

I am thankful to be a part of a tradition which encourages reception of Chrismation, and therefore also of the Most Holy Eucharist, from the time of baptism onward.

Yes. Thank you for the correction Woodstock.

 

[chrisb]

Do you consider this selfishness to be intentional?

When I witness her being rude while playing with other children I must admit it is intentional. She is not acting in love.

I do not understand what you are saying here. Your sentence structure is confusing to me.

Pardon. What I was trying to ask was how do Orthodox Parents, as well as those Byzantine Catholics who observe this practice as well, make the transition from the child partaking communion every week, every month without confession to, all of the sudden, not being able to take communion without first going to confession? Do they feel that they are bad now and when they were young they were good or are they confused that they used to do bad things and get away with it but now they don’t understand why they are having to confess before communion when before they didn’t have too?

When reflecting of the Western Tradition of reserving communion till ‘after’ First Confession I see ‘some’ merit in do so if only because a child’s ‘age of reason’ doesn’t seem ‘fixed’ to any general standard. I know of some seven year old who are very mature and some you aren’t at all and may well not have achieved an age of reason to know good from evil. As I understand this Tradition there are some in the Latin Tradition are looking at this as a possible area where the two Traditions may reach a common practice so I’m very curious about this.

 

[Mickey]

When I witness her being rude while playing with other children I must admit it is intentional. She is not acting in love.

Pardon. What I was trying to ask was how do Orthodox Parents, as well as those Byzantine Catholics who observe this practice as well, make the transition from the child partaking communion every week, every month without confession to, all of the sudden, not being able to take communion without first going to confession? Do they feel that they are bad now and when they were young they were good or are they confused that they used to do bad things and get away with it but now they don’t understand why they are having to confess before communion when before they didn’t have too?

I am detecting a bit of scrupulosity–but I do not know you so perhaps I am way off base.

Our toddler witnesses her parents participating in the Mystery of Reconciliation (It is open confession at the front left corner of the Church). Sometimes my wife holds her while she is confessing–separation anxiety.

She will be taught lovingly and Scripturally and according to the Tradition of the Church. We will not instill any type of analogous punishment or legalism in connection with this wonderful Sacrament.

When reflecting of the Western Tradition of reserving communion till ‘after’ First Confession I see ‘some’ merit in do so if only because a child’s ‘age of reason’ doesn’t seem ‘fixed’ to any general standard.

I do not believe that an “age of reason” should have a bearing on any of the Mysteries of initiation.

I know of some seven year old who are very mature and some you aren’t at all and may well not have achieved an age of reason to know good from evil.

My priest is also my confessor and my spiritual father–he will determine when my daughter is ready for confession.

Peace and blessings,
Mickey

 

[Woodstock]

Chris,

The east doesn’t emphasize going to confession because you were bad. There isn’t a list of mortal sins that must be recited for a valid confession. It is a positive and loving experience, explained as a way to grow closer to God and to overcome our weaknesses. When a child is old enough to understand that he is doing something wrong and should not be doing it, but he does it despite this knowledge, then confession is encouraged as one of the ways to help.

The child sees the priest constantly hearing other people’s confessions, sees his friends and family members up there, and most don’t have a fear or negative view of it.

The parents and priest decide together with the child when the child is ready to begin going and at what interval. A child who is old enough to understand the Mystery is old enough to understand the need for it. Some children might start going at age 6 and others at age 10. It grows out of an active faith life and is a natural progression of it.