Fr. Z: Am I obliged to receive communion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, off the topic of gave vs. mortal sin, and back to Fr. Z’s answer: I wish that rather than simply repeating the absolute minimum necessary - Communion once a year - he had reflected, for the person asking the question, the comments by Pope Pius X concerning frequent Communion.

I feel like that questioner has a bit of residue from Jansenism; certainly we were strongly encouraged to frequent Communion in the 1950’s when I was in grade school.
 
Dan you seem to be making heavy weather of this.

The Canons of relevance (Communion/Confession) are:

1983 Code: Canons 916 (which conflates two Canons from 1917), 960, 988/989, 915,916
1917 Code: Related Canons 650, 699, 744, 785.

Canon 989 has already been quoted above.
The article itself mentions 989.

My 1917 Code numbering does not seem to match yours, c906 is about mixed marriages!
 
Last edited:
Thanks for providing a moment or two of jocularity.

My … dull and inefficient research skills have led me to the discovery that the drafters of the 1983 Code, in reference to the use of “grave sin” instead of “mortal sin” said: “Itemque agitata est quaestio de locutione peccata mortalia loco peccata gravia, sed textus servatur prouti iacet: res potius remittenda est ad commentatores.” So, they left it to others to discuss and hash out.

As for the numbering, yes, something is off. Oh well. Thanks for the response–I do appreciate it.

Dan
 
My own commentary advises it was purposely made ambiguous for the reasons stated above.

But it is clear to me that continued use of the old expression “mortal sin” was no longer tenable given the precise definition provided in the 1992 Catechism.

The old phrase “mortal sin” was itself ambiguous and in fact usually referred to what we now call “grave matter” (the objective component of actual mortal sin).
 
Last edited:
No.
Mortal sin occurs when grave sin is willingly and knowingly committed.

If I don’t know murder is intrinsically evil and kill someone, that’s a grave sin, not a mortal one
 
Actually CCC seems to state serious rather than grave or mortal in 1457.
 
And its source is Canon 989 as it states.
Just variant translations of the same original Latin.

The obligations of the laity are directly found in the Code not the Catechism.
 
I wasn’t???
The question posed here is one of “obligation”, that is of law.
Nobody said it was wise to be so legalistic and spiritually minimalist.
 
Last edited:
No, it’s a venial sin.

If one of the three elements of a mortal sin is lacking, then it is a venial sin.

So I suppose we don’t have to confess our Mortal Sins in confession; we just have to confess our “grave” sins? Right?
 
Last edited:
Yes, but the matter is still grave, making it both grave and venial
 
Last edited:
It can’t be grave and venial at the same time. Grave means mortal.
 
You’re the one challenging the status quo, not me. Everyone as far as I can tell in my experience has understood “grave sin” (not grave MATTER) to mean “mortal sin.”
 
But, if you really want a citation, here is one from Pope St. John-Paul II:

“During the synod assembly some fathers proposed a threefold distinction of sins, classifying them as venial, grave and mortal. This threefold distinction might illustrate the fact that there is a scale of seriousness among grave sins. But it still remains true that the essential and decisive distinction is between sin which destroys charity and sin which does not kill the supernatural life: There is no middle way between life and death.”

It’s from one of his post-synodal apostolic exhortations.

Also, this:

"Considering sin from the point of view of its matter, the ideas of death, of radical rupture with God, the supreme good, of deviation from the path that leads to God or interruption of the journey toward him (which are all ways of defining mortal sin) are linked with the idea of the gravity of sin’s objective content. Hence, in the church’s doctrine and pastoral action, grave sin is in practice identified with mortal sin."

from the same document.
 
Last edited:
However, that isn’t what the catechism says.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
semper_catholicus said:
“During the synod assembly some fathers proposed a threefold distinction of sins, classifying them as venial, grave and mortal. This threefold distinction might illustrate the fact that there is a scale of seriousness among grave sins. But it still remains true that the essential and decisive distinction is between sin which destroys charity and sin which does not kill the supernatural life: There is no middle way between life and death.”

It’s from one of his post-synodal apostolic exhortations.

Also, this:

“Considering sin from the point of view of its matter, the ideas of death, of radical rupture with God, the supreme good, of deviation from the path that leads to God or interruption of the journey toward him (which are all ways of defining mortal sin) are linked with the idea of the gravity of sin’s objective content. Hence, in the church’s doctrine and pastoral action, grave sin is in practice identified with mortal sin.”

from the same document.
Click to expand...
Did you read this reply?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top