M
mardukm
Guest
In what way? Please explain it, for that is not what I ever perceived HH JP2 of thrice-blessed memory to be.
Blessings,
Marduk
In the Eastern Catholic Church, Can One Receive Communion with a Serious Sin on One's Soul?
- Status
Blessings,
Marduk
B
ByzCathCantor
Guest
Wow! From post #400 to post #500 in less than a day, and still counting … with no end in sight!
I wonder how many Eastern Catholics received the Holy Eucharist with serious sin on their soul during that time …
I wonder how many Eastern Catholics received the Holy Eucharist with serious sin on their soul during that time …
B
Bookcat
Guest
B
ByzCathCantor
Guest
What is your specific point in posting these links? Neither expressly addresses the question in the OP.
Further, IMO the latter suggests a course of action that Eastern Christians, Catholic and Orthodox, would never consider appropriate. Somehow I don’t think that is the case you support.
B
Bookcat
Guest
For readers (a few selections):
Question of the thread:
In the Eastern Catholic Churches, Can One Receive Communion with a Serious Sin on One’s Soul?
Answer:
The Catechism of the Catholic Church:
1457 … Anyone who is aware of having committed a mortal sin must not receive Holy Communion, even if he experiences deep contrition, without having first received sacramental absolution, unless he has a grave reason for receiving Communion and there is no possibility of going to confession.57 …
57 Cf. Council of Trent (1551): DS 1647; 1661; CIC, can. 916;** CCEO, can. 711**.
The Catechism References there the Eastern Code of Canon Law 711 which goes into that one is not to receive the Divine Eucharist if one is conscious of serious sin (mortal sin) (outside the exceptional circumstance of a serious reason (grave reason), no possibility of confession, act of perfect contrition and resolve to go to confession as soon as possible–see the Canons for details).
scborromeo.org/ccc/ccc_toc.htm
**ENCYCLICAL LETTER
ECCLESIA DE EUCHARISTIA
**
**Bl. Pope John Paul II **
"Along these same lines, the Catechism of the Catholic Church rightly stipulates that “anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion”.74 "
“I therefore desire to reaffirm that in the Church there remains in force, now and in the future, the rule by which the Council of Trent gave concrete expression to the Apostle Paul’s stern warning when it affirmed that, in order to receive the Eucharist in a worthy manner, “one must first confess one’s sins, when one is aware of mortal sin”.75”
74No. 1385; cf. Code of Canon Law, Canon 916; Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, Canon 711.
Now lets see: what is that foot note 74 there:
It references the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the (Roman) Code of Canon Law AND the EASTERN code
vatican.va/holy_father/jo…e-euch_en.html
St Vladimir Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church:
“SACRAMENT OF PENANCE (CONFESSION)
before Liturgies or by appointment. Parish members should go to Holy Confession at least once a month on average, or more often if there is a serious or mortal sin. In the case of a serious or mortal sin, one may not receive Holy Communion, until they have first gone to Confession and received absolution. For small or ‘daily’ sins, one may receive Holy Communion as often as once a day, provided they have made an examination of conscience, a sincere Act of Contrition, and recited the Prayer before Holy Communion, found in the text of the Liturgy.”
parishesonline.com/script…?p=16&ID=18561
Eastern Catholic Church of the Maronites
From the Pastoral Letter of “MAR NASRALLAH PETER SFEIR BY THE GRACE OF GOD
PATRIARCH OF ANTIOCH AND ALL THE EAST” 2005
"It is written in the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches (CCEO) “Whoever is aware of having committed a grave sin, must receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation, i.e. repentance, before participating in Holy Communion, and those who are publicly unworthy are forbidden to receive the Divine Eucharist”. And the Second Vatican Council says: “They are fully incorporated into the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, accept her whole structure and all the means of salvation established within her, and in her visible framework are united to Christ, who governs her through the Supreme Pontiff and the Bishops, by the bonds of profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government and communion”."
maronite-heritage.com/The%20Eucharist.php
In MISERICORDIA DEI Pope John Paul II:
“Individual and integral confession and absolution are the sole ordinary means by which the faithful, conscious of grave sin, are reconciled with God and the Church; only physical or moral impossibility excuses from such confession, in which case reconciliation can be obtained in other ways”
“…the Council of Trent declared that it is necessary “by divine decree to confess each and every mortal sin”.(7) … Since, therefore, the integral confession of serious sins is by divine decree a constitutive part of the Sacrament,** it is in no way subject to the discretion of pastors (dispensation, interpretation, local customs, etc.)**. In the relevant disciplinary norms, the competent ecclesiastical authority merely indicates the criteria for distinguishing a real impossibility of confessing one’s sins from other situations in which the impossibility is only apparent or can be surmounted.”
"All that I have decreed in this Letter is, by its nature, valid for the venerable Oriental Catholic Churches in conformity with the respective Canons of their own Code."
Given in Rome, at Saint Peter’s, on 7 April, the Second Sunday of Easter, the Feast of Divine Mercy, in the year of our Lord 2002, the twenty-fourth of my Pontificate.
JOHN PAUL II
vatican.va/holy_father/jo…ia-dei_en.html
Question of the thread:
In the Eastern Catholic Churches, Can One Receive Communion with a Serious Sin on One’s Soul?
Answer:
The Catechism of the Catholic Church:
1457 … Anyone who is aware of having committed a mortal sin must not receive Holy Communion, even if he experiences deep contrition, without having first received sacramental absolution, unless he has a grave reason for receiving Communion and there is no possibility of going to confession.57 …
57 Cf. Council of Trent (1551): DS 1647; 1661; CIC, can. 916;** CCEO, can. 711**.
The Catechism References there the Eastern Code of Canon Law 711 which goes into that one is not to receive the Divine Eucharist if one is conscious of serious sin (mortal sin) (outside the exceptional circumstance of a serious reason (grave reason), no possibility of confession, act of perfect contrition and resolve to go to confession as soon as possible–see the Canons for details).
scborromeo.org/ccc/ccc_toc.htm
**ENCYCLICAL LETTER
ECCLESIA DE EUCHARISTIA
**
**Bl. Pope John Paul II **
"Along these same lines, the Catechism of the Catholic Church rightly stipulates that “anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion”.74 "
“I therefore desire to reaffirm that in the Church there remains in force, now and in the future, the rule by which the Council of Trent gave concrete expression to the Apostle Paul’s stern warning when it affirmed that, in order to receive the Eucharist in a worthy manner, “one must first confess one’s sins, when one is aware of mortal sin”.75”
74No. 1385; cf. Code of Canon Law, Canon 916; Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, Canon 711.
Now lets see: what is that foot note 74 there:
It references the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the (Roman) Code of Canon Law AND the EASTERN code
vatican.va/holy_father/jo…e-euch_en.html
St Vladimir Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church:
“SACRAMENT OF PENANCE (CONFESSION)
before Liturgies or by appointment. Parish members should go to Holy Confession at least once a month on average, or more often if there is a serious or mortal sin. In the case of a serious or mortal sin, one may not receive Holy Communion, until they have first gone to Confession and received absolution. For small or ‘daily’ sins, one may receive Holy Communion as often as once a day, provided they have made an examination of conscience, a sincere Act of Contrition, and recited the Prayer before Holy Communion, found in the text of the Liturgy.”
parishesonline.com/script…?p=16&ID=18561
Eastern Catholic Church of the Maronites
From the Pastoral Letter of “MAR NASRALLAH PETER SFEIR BY THE GRACE OF GOD
PATRIARCH OF ANTIOCH AND ALL THE EAST” 2005
"It is written in the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches (CCEO) “Whoever is aware of having committed a grave sin, must receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation, i.e. repentance, before participating in Holy Communion, and those who are publicly unworthy are forbidden to receive the Divine Eucharist”. And the Second Vatican Council says: “They are fully incorporated into the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, accept her whole structure and all the means of salvation established within her, and in her visible framework are united to Christ, who governs her through the Supreme Pontiff and the Bishops, by the bonds of profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government and communion”."
maronite-heritage.com/The%20Eucharist.php
In MISERICORDIA DEI Pope John Paul II:
“Individual and integral confession and absolution are the sole ordinary means by which the faithful, conscious of grave sin, are reconciled with God and the Church; only physical or moral impossibility excuses from such confession, in which case reconciliation can be obtained in other ways”
“…the Council of Trent declared that it is necessary “by divine decree to confess each and every mortal sin”.(7) … Since, therefore, the integral confession of serious sins is by divine decree a constitutive part of the Sacrament,** it is in no way subject to the discretion of pastors (dispensation, interpretation, local customs, etc.)**. In the relevant disciplinary norms, the competent ecclesiastical authority merely indicates the criteria for distinguishing a real impossibility of confessing one’s sins from other situations in which the impossibility is only apparent or can be surmounted.”
"All that I have decreed in this Letter is, by its nature, valid for the venerable Oriental Catholic Churches in conformity with the respective Canons of their own Code."
Given in Rome, at Saint Peter’s, on 7 April, the Second Sunday of Easter, the Feast of Divine Mercy, in the year of our Lord 2002, the twenty-fourth of my Pontificate.
JOHN PAUL II
vatican.va/holy_father/jo…ia-dei_en.html
B
ByzCathCantor
Guest
Are you expecting a different reaction, posting this yet again (at least the 5th time as far as I can count)?
The answer to the subject question in the OP is “NO”, no matter from which perspective you might prefer to look at it. Nothing you have repeatedly posted here changes that answer.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Bookcat, I’ve got to agree with ByzCathCantor.
Quotes can be helpful, of course, but in this case it just seems like a flood of quotes without a clear purpose.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Actually it is not the same post.
It is a selection for readers from various of my posts (and without any colored hightlights
)I would note that those who comment are not the only readers and I tried to pick from the selections to show the answer the Church gives to the question.
If the thread continues…I will likely repeat this post down the road for other new readers who only look for the answer by reading the newer posts…not 500
…or by then maybe 2000
(I wish all a good eventide and many graces!)
P
Peter_J
Guest
I haven’t been keeping an exact count, but it seems to me that the number of quotes you’ve, well, quoted on this thread far surpasses any need. So I wonder why so many?Actually it is not the same post.
It is a selection for readers from various of my posts (and without any colored hightlights
I would note that those who comment are not the only readers and I tried to pick from the selections to show the answer the Church gives to the question.
If the thread continues…I will likely repeat this post down the road for other new readers who only look for the answer by reading the newer posts…not 500
…or by then maybe 2000
C
Cavaradossi
Guest
I have to agree. The constant quotations are getting tiring, and they contribute little to the conversation.
G
George_G
Guest
This entire thread is really depressing. Everyone’s talking past each other, and not actually listening to, and responding to, what’s being said.
I read the EC boards in order to learn about Eastern Christianity and enrich my own Latin understanding of the faith. But it seems that’s a mistake. I should empty my Eastern cup and fill my Latin one, and close my mind to anything outside the Latin tradition, lest it become impure. Right?
. . .
As to the OP, am I right in saying that an Eastern Catholic would indeed avoid communion if they are aware of having committed a serious sin, but that the question of what exactly is a serious sin is approached differently in the East than in the West? That’s the gist of what I got from the thread, though I had to skip most of it. . .
I read the EC boards in order to learn about Eastern Christianity and enrich my own Latin understanding of the faith. But it seems that’s a mistake. I should empty my Eastern cup and fill my Latin one, and close my mind to anything outside the Latin tradition, lest it become impure. Right?
. . .
As to the OP, am I right in saying that an Eastern Catholic would indeed avoid communion if they are aware of having committed a serious sin, but that the question of what exactly is a serious sin is approached differently in the East than in the West? That’s the gist of what I got from the thread, though I had to skip most of it. . .
M
mardukm
Guest
You are on an EASTERN Catholic board. Your answers as a Latin Catholic have not been sufficient to answer the matter from an Eastern or Oriental perspective, so your repetitions can only seem obnoxious.Actually it is not the same post.
It is a selection for readers from various of my posts (and without any colored hightlights
I would note that those who comment are not the only readers and I tried to pick from the selections to show the answer the Church gives to the question.
If the thread continues…I will likely repeat this post down the road for other new readers who only look for the answer by reading the newer posts
Blessings,
Marduk
(I wish all a good eventide and many graces!)
M
mardukm
Guest
Yes, that’s a good summary, brother.
But the conversation got — interesting — when one Latin poster made it seem like it’s all about following the rules, and an Eastern poster made it seem like there is no divine law against approaching the Eucharist unworthily. Mix that in with the “Latins and Easterns are fundamentally different and cannot be united” attitude, and you get a rather long drawn out thread.
Blessings,
Marduk
T
TrueLight
Guest
Good point. You have the two extremes on both ends.Yes, that’s a good summary, brother.
But the conversation got — interesting — when one Latin poster made it seem like it’s all about following the rules, and an Eastern poster made it seem like there is no divine law against approaching the Eucharist unworthily. Mix that in with the “Latins and Easterns are fundamentally different and cannot be united” attitude, and you get a rather long drawn out thread.
Blessings,
Marduk
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Agree’d, interesting thread which I am glad I followed.
B
ByzCathCantor
Guest
He summed it up perfectly
P
Peter_J
Guest
Hi Bookcat. This may or may not be helpful, but I hope it will be. I was rather a late-comer to this thread (in this case I’m measuring “late” not in terms of how long the thread had existed when I started reading it, but in terms of how many posts it hadActually it is not the same post.
It is a selection for readers from various of my posts (and without any colored hightlights
I would note that those who comment are not the only readers and I tried to pick from the selections to show the answer the Church gives to the question.
If the thread continues…I will likely repeat this post down the road for other new readers who only look for the answer by reading the newer posts…not 500
…or by then maybe 2000
(I wish all a good eventide and many graces!)
). One of the first things I noticed, other than the shear length of the thread, was that a great many of the posts were from you. So being somewhat short on time, I found myself skipping many of your posts, especially b/c I noticed that mostly you were just pasting long quotations. So, at least in my case, the point of your posting on this thread has been somewhat lost. (Theoretically I could go back and reading all your posts, if/when I have time to do so; but I’m really not inclined to do so.)
B
Bookcat
Guest
Hence it is better to quotes from the Magisterium of the Catholic Church per se and from the East and not as much from Latin Code of Canon Law
They are from the Catholic Church in large part – or Eastern Churches within Catholic Church --not me as a Roman/Latin Catholic.
They are from the Magisterium of the Catholic Church (the Pope etc) –Eastern Canon Law, Parishes/etc from* Eastern* Catholic Churches and an *Eastern *Catholic Patriarch…
They yes answered the question of the thread.
If someone wishes to explore in more depth they can go to those sources and others on the subject of the Holy Eucharist, Confession etc.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Yes the links from Catholic Answers staff do address the question for it is the same in both codes basically --east and west. And some wanted more in depth …
They give an overview regarding Holy Communion and get into the potential exception for grave reasons (and other qualifications for such …no possiblity to confess etc) which yes the Eastern Code does make clear as does the Catechism of the Catholic Church --but such is an “exception” to use a colloquial word. One only for serious reasons with the other aspects in place. Ordinarily – one must confess a mortal sin one has committed --before Holy Communion.
F
Fone_Bone_2001
Guest
Despite the tension and arguments that sometimes occurred in this thread, I feel like I got a pretty good answer to the principle behind this question:
As someone pointed out earlier, the fact that even Latin canon law permits, under very grave circumstances (i.e. danger of death), the reception of Holy Communion by someone conscious of unconfessed grave sin, proves that it is possible for the Church to make such an offer in a spiritually efficacious manner. She has the authority to do so, in other words. Easterns might call this an exercise of economy.
Nonetheless, it’s clear that in the Latin Church, the current rules - per the legal specificity of Latin spirituality - almost always prohibit someone from receiving Holy Communion while conscious of unconfessed grave sin, and it appears that individual Latin pastors do not have the authority to dispense with this requirement.
But as the (very rare) exception even in the Latin canons proves, it is possible for the Church to do otherwise - as, for instance, in dzheremi’s Coptic Orthodox church, where (he says) his pastor gave him Holy Communion and said he would confess later.
The one thing I still don’t know is whether the current rules that apply in various Oriental Catholic Churches permit such routine, case-by-case exercises of economy regarding reception of Holy Communion, or whether the current rules have essentially imposed a Latin approach on them.
Obviously, all Catholics should be obedient. But it’s certainly been proven to my satisfaction that either approach is possible from a Catholic point of view. Both seem to have great wisdom and advantages to them.
That said, I admit that the clear norm in the Latin Church, to which all of her faithful should be obedient, is to refrain from receiving as long as one is aware of unconfessed grave sin.
As someone pointed out earlier, the fact that even Latin canon law permits, under very grave circumstances (i.e. danger of death), the reception of Holy Communion by someone conscious of unconfessed grave sin, proves that it is possible for the Church to make such an offer in a spiritually efficacious manner. She has the authority to do so, in other words. Easterns might call this an exercise of economy.
Nonetheless, it’s clear that in the Latin Church, the current rules - per the legal specificity of Latin spirituality - almost always prohibit someone from receiving Holy Communion while conscious of unconfessed grave sin, and it appears that individual Latin pastors do not have the authority to dispense with this requirement.
But as the (very rare) exception even in the Latin canons proves, it is possible for the Church to do otherwise - as, for instance, in dzheremi’s Coptic Orthodox church, where (he says) his pastor gave him Holy Communion and said he would confess later.
The one thing I still don’t know is whether the current rules that apply in various Oriental Catholic Churches permit such routine, case-by-case exercises of economy regarding reception of Holy Communion, or whether the current rules have essentially imposed a Latin approach on them.
Obviously, all Catholics should be obedient. But it’s certainly been proven to my satisfaction that either approach is possible from a Catholic point of view. Both seem to have great wisdom and advantages to them.
That said, I admit that the clear norm in the Latin Church, to which all of her faithful should be obedient, is to refrain from receiving as long as one is aware of unconfessed grave sin.
- Status