Found First Communion Book from the 1970's

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tired_Mama
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tired_Mama

Guest
In case there was any doubt how bad things really were in the 1970’s, my mom found the book we used to prepare to receive First Communion. This was in the late 1970’s and the book was published in 1972. Shudder.

First, there is no mention in the book that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ. This is how it defines the Eucharist “When I receive communion, I am one with the Lord, one with my family, one with God’s family. The bread I shall receive is a very special bread. It is the Bread of Life.”

There is no mention of the necessity of being in a state of grace. Or of going to confession first.

This is how it defines the Eucharist:
It’s about Belonging
It’s about Celebrating
It’s about making Peace
It’s about Listening
It’s about Caring
It’s about Giving Thanks for Creation
It’s about Giving thanks for New Life
It’s about Sharing a Meal
It’s about Going Forth to Make a Better World
 
What does the front of the book look like? I received my First Communion in 1993, and this sounds a lot like what I was taught. Though, to be fair, my “New St. Joseph Children’s Missal” I received for a gift in 1993 for my First Communion was copyrighted 1977 and it clearly states, “As the priest shows us the Host, we express our faith that we are receiving Jesus the Lord.” and there is no communion in the hand. The picture clearly depicts that at that time communion on the tongue was still the norm.
 
It’s gold and it doesn’t have any pictures showing the reception of Communion. We were taught to receive in the hand.
 
I remember my first communion, the Priest wanted all kids in blue and white outfits for the celebration. We were poor so I only had brown shirt and brown pants. The kids laughed at me while the Priest scolded me for not having blue tie and blue pants.

Since then I have learned that life and Jesus is more than a blue shirt and blue tie, its what is in the heart.
 
Tired_Mama said:
It’s gold and it doesn’t have any pictures showing the reception of Communion. We were taught to receive in the hand.
Click to expand...
We used that lovely book as well. I found mine a few years ago and went through the same thing. Thankfully, I managed to figure it out anyway. I was Byzantine Rite, although I attended a Latin Rite school. The Byzantine prayer before Communion is so explicit that you can’t really miss that you are receiving our Lord himself. In my school, we also received First Communion in 2nd grade, but Confession (the silver book) wasn’t received until 4th grade. :eek:
 
It is more a sign of the state of educational theory in the early 1970s that a book designed for 6 and 7 year olds doesn’t delve too deeply into theology. The definitions of the Eucharist are correct, but not complete.

We are all not 7 anymore and it isn’t 1972 anymore. Best to spend our energy on ensuring that our own children learn a proper reverance for the Eucharist and God, then complain about what our catechism book looked like.
 
Mrs_Sally said:
It is more a sign of the state of educational theory in the early 1970s that a book designed for 6 and 7 year olds doesn’t delve too deeply into theology. The definitions of the Eucharist are correct, but not complete.

We are all not 7 anymore and it isn’t 1972 anymore. Best to spend our energy on ensuring that our own children learn a proper reverance for the Eucharist and God, then complain about what our catechism book looked like.
Click to expand...
I think that it is important for us to understand how things were taught back then. There are many Catholics in their 30s and 40s whose understanding of the Eucharist stayed at that point. Those are the Catholics who do not understand or believe in the real presence. We might have managed to pick it up at some point, but it is a reality that an entire generation was taught information that, while not in error, was incomplete.

As far as it being the prevailing education theory, you are right. We underestimate the ability of children to understand. I think it is easier for a 4 year old to understand the Real Presence than for an adult to really grasp it.
 
babochka said:
I think that it is important for us to understand how things were taught back then. There are many Catholics in their 30s and 40s whose understanding of the Eucharist stayed at that point. Those are the Catholics who do not understand or believe in the real presence. We might have managed to pick it up at some point, but it is a reality that an entire generation was taught information that, while not in error, was incomplete.

As far as it being the prevailing education theory, you are right. We underestimate the ability of children to understand. I think it is easier for a 4 year old to understand the Real Presence than for an adult to really grasp it.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The majority of kids in that class with me are no longer practicing Catholics.
 
Makes me SO grateful that my school held onto the Baltimore Catechsim!
 
Seeker1961 said:
Makes me SO grateful that my school held onto the Baltimore Catechsim!
Click to expand...
Maybe, but the majority of those who did the mass exodus from the Church in the 60’s and 70’s were taught using the Baltimore Catechism, including me for more than a few years. I think the Catechism was more precise, but it didn’t stop people from leaving the Church.

My children used that gold book, and they both knew that the Eucharist is the body and blood of Christ. A lot depends on who is doing the teaching. I can’t say they received the best Catholic education, but they did manage to get that point across.
 
Tired_Mama said:
It’s gold and it doesn’t have any pictures showing the reception of Communion. We were taught to receive in the hand.
Click to expand...
Unless you are at an EF Mass, receiving in the hand is the usual in the US with the Latin/Roman rite, so it’s not a surprise that you were taught that.

If you look back through the archives here on CAF, you’ll find a multitude of threads about CITT and COTH.
 
Communion in the hand is the result of an indult. It isn’t the official default way.
 
katy said:
Communion in the hand is the result of an indult. It isn’t the official default way.
Click to expand...
Yes, I *am * aware of that. I was simply pointing out that it’s no surprise she was taught that way since it’s the way most of American Catholics receive.
 
LightBound said:
Unless you are at an EF Mass, receiving in the hand is the norm in the US with the Latin/Roman rite, so it’s not a surprise that you were taught that.

If you look back through the archives here on CAF, you’ll find a multitude of threads about CITT and COTH.
Click to expand...
I was not aware that a “norm” was ever established for CITH. As far as I know, CITH was first permitted as an indult for existing behavior and eventually accorded an “equal choice” status with COTT. This is in contrast to reception of commmunion while standing, which is a norm, while the faithful retain the right to receive while kneeling as an option.

Here in the L&S forum, you should be careful of your use of terminology, because words have a very specific meaning in the Church and in liturgical law. A “norm” is something that is the standard by law, not simply the “usual way people do it.”
 
Elizium23 said:
I was not aware that a “norm” was ever established for CITH. As far as I know, CITH was first permitted as an indult for existing behavior and eventually accorded an “equal choice” status with COTT. This is in contrast to reception of commmunion while standing, which is a norm, while the faithful retain the right to receive while kneeling as an option.
Click to expand...
I’m talking about how most of the Catholics in America receive the Eucharist . I will be more cautious about using a term that in general conversation may mean one thing, but on this subforum, means another. I went back and corrected my terminology on my post in question.
 
Wiseowl said:
I remember my first communion, the Priest wanted all kids in blue and white outfits for the celebration. We were poor so I only had brown shirt and brown pants. The kids laughed at me while the Priest scolded me for not having blue tie and blue pants.

Since then I have learned that life and Jesus is more than a blue shirt and blue tie, its what is in the heart.
Click to expand...
And more than a book with pictures in it.
 
Wiseowl said:
I remember my first communion, the Priest wanted all kids in blue and white outfits for the celebration. We were poor so I only had brown shirt and brown pants. The kids laughed at me while the Priest scolded me for not having blue tie and blue pants.

Since then I have learned that life and Jesus is more than a blue shirt and blue tie, its what is in the heart.
Click to expand...
:amen:
 
Tired_Mama said:
It’s gold and it doesn’t have any pictures showing the reception of Communion. We were taught to receive in the hand.
Click to expand...
👍 That’s so great that your mom kept the First Holy Communion book for you, and you were taught to receive our Lord, and that you did so.
 
That wouldn’t be the “we celebrate the Eucharist” series, would it? I was appalled when I saw that definition. Thank God our parish uses something different now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top