Eucharist - how often required

[twf]

I understand that in many of the Byzantine Catholic churches, the Sunday ‘obligation’ can be fulfilled by Saturday night vespers OR Sunday DL. in theory, wouldn’t this allow a Byzantine Catholic the possibility of going months and months (or years) without receiving Holy Communion? In the Latin Church the faithful are required to receive Communion at least once during the Easter season. Is there a similar rule in the various Byzantine Churches? What About the Oriental Catholic Churches?

 

[Kalos]

If you love Jesus it is not a matter of law. If youare married, do you need a regulation to tell how often to kiss your mate? If you want to know Jesus and His healing power then you will want daily communion.

 

[twf]

Kalos: Of course we should and hopefully do WANT daily communion with Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ…but that wasn’t my question. The Church knows, however, that many Christians, like little children, need certain rules/guidelines to make sure we do things the Church knows are good for us…hopefully with time, as we mature in Christ, we’ll follow the Church’s prescripts out of love and not obligation. The young child obey’s his parents because he’s obliged to - the mature adult honors his parents out of love.

 

[Cluny]

<<I understand that in many of the Byzantine Catholic churches, the Sunday ‘obligation’ can be fulfilled by Saturday night vespers OR Sunday DL. i>>

Actually, the “obligation” derives on the Parish to offer as full a liturgical cycle as possbie: Vespers, Matins, the Hours, and Divine Liturgy.

The “obligaion” of the individual is to be present at as much of this as he can. This means, if at all possible, Vespers AND Divine Liturgy.

I know a very devout man who for reasons of health and transportation cannot be present at Vespers on Saturday night as well as Divine Liturgy, as much as he would like to attend both. So he only attends Sunday Liturgy–not as a minimum, but as the maximum that is in his strength. He has also said that if the Parish offered Sunday Matins, he would be there for that before Liturgy.

 

[tee_eff_em]

I understand that in many of the Byzantine Catholic churches, the Sunday ‘obligation’ can be fulfilled by Saturday night vespers OR Sunday DL. in theory, wouldn’t this allow a Byzantine Catholic the possibility of going months and months (or years) without receiving Holy Communion? In the Latin Church the faithful are required to receive Communion at least once during the Easter season. Is there a similar rule in the various Byzantine Churches? What About the Oriental Catholic Churches?

NB that a Latin Rite Catholic may also go *months and months … without receiving Holy Communion *-- The Sunday obligation is to assist at Mass, not to receive Holy Communion.

The Catechism teaches to Catholics of all rites, and says:

1389 The Church obliges the faithful “to take part in the Divine Liturgy on Sundays and feast days” and, prepared by the sacrament of Reconciliation,

to receive the Eucharist at least once a year, if possible during the Easter season

. But the Church strongly encourages the faithful to receive the holy Eucharist on Sundays and feast days, or more often still, even daily.

This does cf to CIC 920. I am not sure of an authentic interpretation of CCEO 708?:

Can. 708 - Curent Hierarchae loci ac parochi, ut omni diligentia christifideles instruantur de obligatione Divinam Eucharistiam suscipiendi in periculo mortis necnon temporibus a laudabilissima traditione vel iure particulari propriae Ecclesiae sui iuris statutis, praesertim vero tempore Paschali, in quo Christus Dominus eucharistica mysteria tradidit.

Canon 708
The local hierarchs and the pastors are to see that with every diligence the Christian faithful are instructed concerning the obligation of receiving the Divine Eucharist in danger of death and also at those times which are established by a most praiseworthy custom or by particular law of their own Church sui iuris, especially at Easter time, during which Christ handed down the eucharistic mystery.

Does the phrase *“especially at Easter time…” *indicate an *apt *time to oblige the faithful to receive? Or is it meant to be an example of one such time which has been established by a most praiseworthy custom?

tee

 

[trophybearer]

There shouldn’t even need to be a rule. IMHO if you’re only recieving communion once a year, let alone out of an obligation, you have greater spiritual issues to worry about than whether or not you’ve broken this “rule”.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

There shouldn’t even need to be a rule. IMHO if you’re only recieving communion once a year, let alone out of an obligation, you have greater spiritual issues to worry about than whether or not you’ve broken this “rule”.

While I agree that there should not need to be a rule, we should also not place any judgments on others and the frequency of their reception of the Eucharist.

 

[trophybearer]

While I agree that there should not need to be a rule, we should also not place any judgments on others and the frequency of their reception of the Eucharist.

Of course not, but I have a hard time believing that anyone who is able to recieve more often than once a year would not be advised to do so. It’s definitely not any of my business who approaches the chalice from week to week.

 

[LilyM]

Of course not, but I have a hard time believing that anyone who is able to recieve more often than once a year would not be advised to do so. It’s definitely not any of my business who approaches the chalice from week to week.

Remember the rule is the same for confession.

St Joan of Arc, it would seem from her trial transcripts, had times where she received both confession and Holy Communion infrequently - in fact once a month seems to have been the maximum, and there is a mention of once a year in there as well.

No-one has ever suggested that this sainted daughter of the Church was in the slightest unable to receive more often. However, equally no-one has ever suggested that she was in error in any way for not receiving Communion frequently.

As a matter of abundant caution, and heeding the words of St Paul about the dangers of receiving unworthily, many laity and religious were advised by their priests not to receive too often.

In fact even priests were known to sometimes omit the words of consecration from Mass (which they could do without detection as the Canon was silent) so that THEY would not receive unworthily. Clearly, as gravely sinful in itself as aping the sacraments and deceiving the faithful in this way is, some preferred that sin to the sin of receiving Our Lord in a state of sin.

Such was the prevailing attitude of maintaining a respectful distance from the Eucharist until (and for a good time after) Pope St Pius X, in recent centuries, encouraged frequent, even daily, Communion.

I think the rule is there, as much as anything, to tell those who live in isolated areas or otherwise have difficulties in confessing and communing, that they really need to make the effort, even if it is difficult for them, to receive these two vital sacraments at least once a year.

 

[Aramis]

I understand that in many of the Byzantine Catholic churches, the Sunday ‘obligation’ can be fulfilled by Saturday night vespers OR Sunday DL. in theory, wouldn’t this allow a Byzantine Catholic the possibility of going months and months (or years) without receiving Holy Communion? In the Latin Church the faithful are required to receive Communion at least once during the Easter season. Is there a similar rule in the various Byzantine Churches? What About the Oriental Catholic Churches?

The rule is in the CCEO, and is identical to the Roman: at least once a year.

The Ruthenian Rule, as expressed by Bishop George, of eternal memory, and by 3 priests of the eparchy, is minimum 2 confessions a year, one during great fast and one during St. Phillip’s fast. One should be communed at least once following each confession.