First Communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter GregoryPalamas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GregoryPalamas

Guest
I teach Theology 101 at a local Catholic University. Invarably when ask to list the seven sacraments of the Church about 1/2 the students will include “First” communion as a sacrament as in “I made my first communion”. Usually when someone writes this I comment something like “Whenever someone goes to communion for the first time one may call that first communion but that is not the name of the sacrament.” It usually turns out that very few of the students who proclaim “first” communion to be a sacrament that they have made attend Mass with any regularity.

I don’t know about you but the idea of “making first communion” troubles me greatly on several levels not only for the person who has experienced this unusual sacrament but for the Church that inadvertantly promotes it.

First, to say one “makes” first communion suggests that the student believes that they have rightly jumped through a hoop and overcome an obstacle the completion of which entitles them to eternal rewards just by having “made” the event. Is it any wonder that persons who think this way are susceptible to the charge that “the Catholic Church teaches ‘works righteousness’?”

Second, the adjective “first” suggests for many “only” at least in practicle terms. For many of the students using this phrase it really was the only time they received or ever thought they needed to receive the Eucharist. Most do not even know that “Eucharist” is the better term for the sacrament or even if they did would have no idea that “Eucharist” has a much fuller and more specific meaning that does communion.

Third, there are numerous bad theological ideas that have crept into the Church because of the separation of the three initiating sacraments. This is where the heirarchy must bare the major blame. I’m Eastern Catholic and have not noticed these same problems. We have our own set, just not these particular ones. The distinction comes precisely at the point that while the Eastern Church has mostly retained the practice of offering the three sacraments of initiation together the Roman Church has divided them. The unintended consequence of this division is the impression that while Baptism is a gift of grace, the other two sacraments are individual achievements. This misapprehension is encouraged by the practice of training sessions that are rewarded with “first communion” and then later “confirmation”.

In fairness many come through this with a firm and often mature faith. I suggest that it may be in spite of this all too common experience and not because of it.

Help me think through this. I’m not trying to be insulting but I would like to have help to think my way through this.

CDL
 
GregoryPalamas said:
I teach Theology 101 at a local Catholic University. Invarably when ask to list the seven sacraments of the Church about 1/2 the students will include “First” communion as a sacrament as in “I made my first communion”. Usually when someone writes this I comment something like “Whenever someone goes to communion for the first time one may call that first communion but that is not the name of the sacrament.” It usually turns out that very few of the students who proclaim “first” communion to be a sacrament that they have made attend Mass with any regularity.

I don’t know about you but the idea of “making first communion” troubles me greatly on several levels not only for the person who has experienced this unusual sacrament but for the Church that inadvertantly promotes it.

First, to say one “makes” first communion suggests that the student believes that they have rightly jumped through a hoop and overcome an obstacle the completion of which entitles them to eternal rewards just by having “made” the event. Is it any wonder that persons who think this way are susceptible to the charge that “the Catholic Church teaches ‘works righteousness’?”

Second, the adjective “first” suggests for many “only” at least in practicle terms. For many of the students using this phrase it really was the only time they received or ever thought they needed to receive the Eucharist. Most do not even know that “Eucharist” is the better term for the sacrament or even if they did would have no idea that “Eucharist” has a much fuller and more specific meaning that does communion.

Third, there are numerous bad theological ideas that have crept into the Church because of the separation of the three initiating sacraments. This is where the heirarchy must bare the major blame. I’m Eastern Catholic and have not noticed these same problems. We have our own set, just not these particular ones. The distinction comes precisely at the point that while the Eastern Church has mostly retained the practice of offering the three sacraments of initiation together the Roman Church has divided them. The unintended consequence of this division is the impression that while Baptism is a gift of grace, the other two sacraments are individual achievements. This misapprehension is encouraged by the practice of training sessions that are rewarded with “first communion” and then later “confirmation”.

In fairness many come through this with a firm and often mature faith. I suggest that it may be in spite of this all too common experience and not because of it.

Help me think through this. I’m not trying to be insulting but I would like to have help to think my way through this.

CDL
Click to expand...
I would be better to say “We receive (our) First Holy Communion”.
Using the term Eucharist is problematic because of the multiple uses of the term.
We can attend Mass (Eucharistic Liturgy) and not receive any Sacrament. We can visit Christ in the Blessed Sacrament (The Eucharist) in the Tabernacle or at Adoration and not receive a Sacrament. We only receive a Sacrament and Sacramental Grace when we receive “Holy Communion”. So the Sacrament of “Holy Communion” is more of a proper name of the Sacrament we receive.
 
Br.,

Thank you for the qualifications and corrections but what of some of my main points?

CDL
 
I don’t know if I can add anything that will help you think through this, as you requested, but I offer this comment that validates one of your points.

I remember being a little confused as a teen about exactly what the sacrament was, because in my own mind I always referred to it as First Holy Communion. The emphasis was on “First” rather than “Holy Communion.”

I think catechesis must emphasize, as Br. Rich pointed out, that the sacrament is rightly called Holy Communion. The receiving of our own First Holy Communion is certainly something to be celebrated, but it is only the first communion. The real emphasis should be on the “ongoing-ness” of this sacrament–something to be repeated as often as possible. Now, that is something to celebrate!
 
I just think that the way it’s currently set up, where first Communion and Confirmation are separate, that it gives the impression that Confirmation isn’t an important Sacrament. There was a girl in my RCIA class last year who said she had never been Confirmed because she (and her parents) “didn’t see the point” if she was already receiving the Eucharist.
 
THutch04 said:
I just think that the way it’s currently set up, where first Communion and Confirmation are separate, that it gives the impression that Confirmation isn’t an important Sacrament. There was a girl in my RCIA class last year who said she had never been Confirmed because she (and her parents) “didn’t see the point” if she was already receiving the Eucharist.
Click to expand...
Not only that but the order is wrong. Why would anyone think that they ought to eat the meal before they are welcomed into the family. For that matter why give birth to a Christian and then starve them for 7 or 8 years before they are allowed Communion.

The proper order is Baptism, Confirmation, then Communion. It seems best to do them all at once and probably at infancy.

CDL
 
It’s hard to figure why the Roman Catholic heirarchy thought it would make sense to twist the order around. I understand the rational but I think it has created more problems than it’s worth. Rumours have it that Pope Benedict XVI will slowly bring the order back.

In some areas of the world the order never did get twisted as it is in most American diocese. Let’s hope that he is successful.

Now if you folks could get the priest facing the proper direction, get rid of the altar girls, and renew the monasteries by removing the active homosexualists you will be on your way to reform.

CDL
 
In any event, it is simply not appropriate to say “I made my first communion” or list “First communion” as a sacrament. Where did such an attitude come from? Are there attempts to correct it?

CDL
 
I think the main problem is poor parenting. In the past, parents always took their children to Mass every Sunday. Now, there are many families who only attend Mass so their kids can “make their First Communion”, then you never see the families in church again until it is “time for their kids to make their Confirmation”. If the parents don’t raise the children in the Catholic faith, it really isn’t the kids’ fault for having no idea of what the Sacraments are. Blame the parents, not the children.
 
This is why it’s so important for catechists and parents to be precise in their terminology.

My case mirrors the situation you described with your students. The focus was on making my First Holy Communion. So, as I mentioned in my previous post, the emphasis to me seemed on First, rather than Communion, so I thought the sacrament was the first communion. I eventually figured it out that the sacrament was receiving the Eucharist.

Truly, the whole problem here is one of catechesis. I think the Church was in a state of turmoil after Vatican II, and those of us who were in CCD in the late '60’s through the '70’s did not get, shall we say, stellar teaching. Can you believe I was never taught the Rosary? I never learned how to pray a Rosary until I was an adult and was moved to learn on my own. I am still a little miffed over that.

I thought things had improved since then. I know my kids are receiving a MUCH better CCD education than I got. But your experience with your students says otherwise, unless you are teaching older students…baby boomers and Gen X.
 
jpjd, (How does one pronounce that?)

I teach Theology 101 at an area Catholic University. Students range in age from 18-35 or 40 but most are 18-20 yo. I don’t know how to analyze the state of CCD or RCIA since I’ve really never experienced either. I’m a convert to the Byzantine Catholic Church from years as a United Methodist pastor.

Eastern Catholics offer the initiatory sacraments all at once. Children then are catechized as fully part of the family. We emphasize the work of the Holy Spirit upon the whole person throughout their lives. If an adult comes for initiation they are catechized by the priest and receive all the sacraments at the same liturgy unless, of course, they have already been properly baptized before.

Getting the order right once again and deemphasizing the notion that we “take First Communion” and “take Confirmation” will jar it loose from the idea that we have accomplished something on our own and our “obligation” to Christ and His Church is over.

CDL
 
My screen name isn’t “pronounced,” it’s just the letters j-p-j-d. It’s the first initials of my family members!

I share your concern for proper catechesis, but I’m a bit troubled by your assertions that Eastern Catholicism has the sacraments right and Roman Catholicism does not.

The Church says both are acceptable.

I personally prefer the Roman Catholic way because I like that, with proper catechesis, the children are taught what the sacrament is all about BEFORE they receive it. They should understand what the Eucharist really is before receiving their first Communion. They should be prepared (by learning the teachings of our faith and participating in good works – all done via their CCD classes) to go into the world and be a living witness for the love of God before they receive Confirmation.

After all, we don’t allow kids to drive until they are 16, or vote until 18, because that is when society has deemed them capable of handling the responsibility. Likewise with the Roman Catholic Church and the sacraments of the Eucharist and Confirmation. The Western Church has deemed approximately 2nd grade and 8th grade the age at which the children are capable of understanding the sacraments they will be receiving.

That’s what seems right to me.

Anyway, the Eastern and Western Churches should both be focusing on providing the most excellent catechesis we can muster. And that starts with the parents and continues with the teachers and ends with the individuals continuing self-education in their adult years.
 
I’m going to have to agree with GregoryPalamas here. I think we would do well to remember that the Sacraments are gifts from God, and not something “earned” by being a certain age. I’ve had people tell me that kids receive Confirmation when they can “accept” the faith as their own. This reasoning seems like we are assigning our own meaning to the sacrament rather than what God has assigned and frankly sounds quite Protesant to me. This is what Bishop Olmsted of Phoenix has to say:

13. Isn’t Confirmation a sacrament of maturity that should come after First Eucharist?

Not really. Confirmation is actually the completion of Baptism (by the full gift of the Holy Spirit). The perfection of baptismal grace found in the Sacrament of Confirmation is not dependent upon age or knowledge of the confirmand. The grace that is conferred is a free gift and ‘does not need ratification to become effective (Cf. CCC 1308). The common practice of high school reception of Confirmation has given the impression that somehow the sacrament is merited by virtue of age or training. In truth, the Sacrament of Confirmation is an effective vehicle of grace at any age as long as it is validly conferred. Thus, those that receive the sacrament are able to reap its benefits from the moment of reception. The graces of this sacrament conferred at a young age could be of great assistance to young people as they grow toward adolescence and young adulthood.

Regardless of age, Confirmation is always a Sacrament of Initiation. The important thing to remember is that sacraments are not about age alone, they are about growing in faith, about sharing in God’s grace. In the Diocese of Phoenix as of May 15th, 2005 established the reception of Confirmation and First Eucharist in the Third grade.
 
My personal thought is that the first reception of the Eucharist should take place when one is being Confirmed. If Confirmation is a Sacrament of Initiation, then in my opinion, one should be a “full member” to receive the Eucharist.

I know so many Catholics who don’t really see the point in being Confirmed if they’re allowed to receive the Eucharist. I think that at whatever age it’s received, Confirmation should come before the Eucharist.
 
wynd said:
I’m going to have to agree with GregoryPalamas here. I think we would do well to remember that the Sacraments are gifts from God, and not something “earned” by being a certain age.
Click to expand...
No one said anything about sacraments being earned. The Western Church has never had the view that sacraments are earned.

This subject is not up for debate in the Church and I find it upsetting to even discuss it, so I will opt out of this thread now.

Pax,

jpjd
 
GregoryPalamas said:
IFirst, to say one “makes” first communion suggests that the student believes that they have rightly jumped through a hoop and overcome an obstacle the completion of which entitles them to eternal rewards just by having “made” the event. Is it any wonder that persons who think this way are susceptible to the charge that “the Catholic Church teaches ‘works righteousness’?”
Click to expand...
Sounds like you have never been through an RCIA course. As an RCIA Candidate, I can assure you we are indeed jumping through numerous hoops like well trained circus animals to get to the easter Vigil and “First Communion.”

In my case, this will be my first communion AS A CATHOLIC. I assume all those communions in the Lutheran Church do not count
 
GregoryPalamas, what rite are you? I know in my rite, Chaldean, we recieve both Baptism and Confirmation (which makes sense) however we don’t recieve (to my knowledge) Holy Eucharist.

There is also a problem about recieving Confirmation in the Latin rite at ages 16+ because a lot of people think that its something “they” are doing, instead of something the Holy Spirit is actually doing.
 
Hail Mary,

I’m Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic. I am also a convert after having served as a United Methodist Elder (Pastor) for 27 years.

CDL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top