In the Eastern Catholic Church, Can One Receive Communion with a Serious Sin on One's Soul?

[TrueLight]

I just wanted to post what I had said in the original discussion:

---

If you genuinly want to understand the Eastern perspective, you have get out of the Western mindset of the division of sins. I could go more indepth about this, but it is a side topic.

Compare it to this. I hear the debate come up on this forum (I have actually floated around here since 2004) quite frequently - can a confessor require a murder to turn himself in as penance? Answer: no, but if he is truly repentant he should turn himself in on his own.

Now take that and apply it to this discussion. In the Eastern perspective, there are three ways to receive forgiveness of sins (annointing of the sick - we all receive it at least once a year because we also give it for spiritual sickness, not just physical-, confession and Eucharist). All three offer the ability to forgive sins and heal the person. Only confession, however, offers you the ability to discuss these shortcomings with a confessor who can offer advice, guidance, a spiritual regiment to help you improve, and support. If there is something that is severely hampering your path to God, what one might say is a serious sin (but keep in mind in the East this could potentially be different for everyone depending on their personal spiritual place - ie what consitutes serious may very from a monk on Mt Athos to a recent convert), then for true repentance, you should see your spiritual father (confessor) for guidance to ensure you can overcome the shortcomings and prepare for the Eucharist. It is the same double sword as above. You have to be truly repentant, and to be truly repentant you must experience metanoia (a desire to change), and to express that desire to change you need to see and discuss the matter with a confessor.

On a side note, Eastern Christian culture places a very heavy emphasis on people developing close relationships with spiritual fathers and mothers who know there personal circumstances and can advise them on an intimate level. Confession is expected to be done on a very regular basis, often weekly, regardless of sins committed. Everyone needs guidance. Of course, many EO and EC have allowed this practice to fall wayside in the face of secularism the way the Western churches are troubled as well.

Thanks for resposting. I didn’t want to respond in the other thread as it is true that we had hijacked the thread.

So are you able to give me a direct answer?

Can someone with serious sin on their soul receive communion?

And by that, I don’t mean that they are not sorry.

Let’s say the night before I slept with my boyfriend. I feel really bad but have not had a chance to go to confession. Can I receive communion under most circumstances (not speaking of exceptions)?

 

[mardukm]

Let’s say the night before I slept with my boyfriend. I feel really bad but have not had a chance to go to confession. Can I receive communion under most circumstances (not speaking of exceptions)?

I actually asked a Latin Catholic this priest once (well- not for THAT particular sin ). He said that you can, if you are truly contrite in your heart it is your intention to go to confession ASAP.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Bookcat]

I actually asked a Latin Catholic this priest once (well- not for THAT particular sin ). He said that you can, if you are truly contrite in your heart it is your intention to go to confession ASAP.

Blessings,
Marduk

He would be incorrect.

CCC 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…

 

[dzheremi]

Yeah, I was always taught that’s a definite no-no. I don’t know how much the ECC’s might differ from the Latin viewpoint espoused by the CCC, though. This is one of the things I’ve struggled to adjust to in the Orthodox Church, as when I asked that question of someone from church (without using the term “mortal”, as that would just be confusing to them), they were shocked: “How do you expect to get better without the body and blood of Christ?” Touché, my friend. Of course, you tell father beforehand that you will need to confess A.S.A.P. afterwards, but with that understanding, there don’t seem to be any problems. It still feels weird, though.

 

[mardukm]

He would be incorrect.

CCC 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…

You forgot to quote the rest of the excerpt. Here it is in full:

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

I may have misinterpreted the OP’s statement “did not have a chance to go” as “there was no way I could go.” The example I gave to the priest is when you feel you really need communion to deal with a spiritual struggle, you intend to go to confession before Mass, stand in line for an hour, and the priest leaves before you have a chance to confess. The priest told me it would be OK. I think the situation I gave fits the situation given in the CCC.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Bookcat]

You forgot to quote the rest of the excerpt. Here it is in full:

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

I may have misinterpreted the OP’s statement “did not have a chance to go” as “there was no way I could go.” The example I gave to the priest is when you feel you really need communion to deal with a spiritual struggle, you intend to go to confession before Mass, stand in line for an hour, and the priest leaves before you have a chance to confess. The priest told me it would be OK. I think the situation I gave fits the situation given in the CCC.

Blessings,
Marduk

I addressed that already (and quoted it) above.

It did not apply there.

The example given there was NOT some grave/serious reason and where it was not possible to get to confession and the person had made a perfect act of contrition with the resolve/intent to go to confession as soon as possible. Such exceptions are just that.

 

[mardukm]

Yeah, I was always taught that’s a definite no-no. I don’t know how much the ECC’s might differ from the Latin viewpoint espoused by the CCC, though. This is one of the things I’ve struggled to adjust to in the Orthodox Church, as when I asked that question of someone from church (without using the term “mortal”, as that would just be confusing to them), they were shocked: “How do you expect to get better without the body and blood of Christ?” Touché, my friend. Of course, you tell father beforehand that you will need to confess A.S.A.P. afterwards, but with that understanding, there don’t seem to be any problems. It still feels weird, though.

The early Church considered deprivation of the Eucharist as a regular part of penitential practice, to enjoin in the penitent the seriousness of one’s sin. Yeah – even AFTER confession. Do you really think not communing while one has NOT confessed is in any way inappropriate? I think we gotta admit nothing in any of our Churches today (CCC, OOC, or EOC) can compare to the penitential attitude enjoined by the early Fathers of the Church.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Bookcat]

ECCLESIA DE EUCHARISTIA --Bl. Pope John Paul Encyclical

“If a Christian’s conscience is burdened by serious sin, then the path of penance through the sacrament of Reconciliation becomes necessary for full participation in the Eucharistic Sacrifice.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church notes:

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) etc etc as noted above).

scborromeo.org/ccc/ccc_toc.htm

 

[mardukm]

I addressed that already (and quoted it) above.

It did not apply there.

The example given there was NOT some grave/serious reason and where it was not possible to get to confession and the person had made a perfect act of contrition with the resolve/intent to go to confession as soon as possible. Such exceptions are just that.

And how can you judge what is grave/serious in the heart, mind, soul of a person for the sake of his/her own spiritual welfare?

Sorry, I don’t agree with your opinion.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Bookcat]

And how can you judge what is grave/serious in the heart, mind, soul of a person for the sake of his/her own spiritual welfare?

Sorry, I don’t agree with your opinion.

Blessings,
Marduk

I have no window into another persons soul --as to if they had the knowledge etc—if you mean the example – well they were giving it that the person had committed a serious sin in the example that was the premise.

But in real life:

The person has to examine themselves…

To commit a serious sin one needs the three aspects --see the Catechism of the Catholic Church (grave matter, full knowledge and deliberate consent)

 

[Bookcat]

ECCLESIA DE EUCHARISTIA --Bl. Pope John Paul Encyclical

“If a Christian’s conscience is burdened by serious sin, then the path of penance through the sacrament of Reconciliation becomes necessary for full participation in the Eucharistic Sacrifice.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church notes:

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) etc etc as noted above).

scborromeo.org/ccc/ccc_toc.htm

 

[jwinch2]

He said that you can, if you are truly contrite in your heart it is your intention to go to confession ASAP.

Blessings,
Marduk

I believe the priest you spoke to, while well intended, was incorrect. My own pastor counselled me similarly several months back. He then contacted me and asked me to hold off while he spoke to some of his brother priests, one who has his doctorate theology and the other in canon law. Both told him that this allowance was only for truly extenuating circumstances rather than just, “I sinned last night and there is no appointments for confession prior to mass…”.

If you are shipping off to war, or live in a remote location where you have limited access to a priest, then the answer would be likely different. However, the average parish going Catholic in the US or much of the rest of the world, would not qualify.

In addition, I have seen situations where the confession line right before a Mass was too long for the priests to get through everyone so a general absolution was given with the admonishment that they needed to stick around after Mass and give a good confession. Again though, this is not the same as someone saying “I committed XYZ mortal sin last night and haven’t had a chance to get to confession”.

When in doubt though a faithful Catholic should always just follow the advice of his/her pastor in such issues. If they are truly seeking to do things the right way they have every right to expect that their pastor will give them the correct guidance. Of course this implies that priests take the time to check on issues like this where there are potentially subjective decisions which must be made to ensure that they are giving good advice.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Thanks for resposting. I didn’t want to respond in the other thread as it is true that we had hijacked the thread.

So are you able to give me a direct answer?

Can someone with serious sin on their soul receive communion?

And by that, I don’t mean that they are not sorry.

Let’s say the night before I slept with my boyfriend. I feel really bad but have not had a chance to go to confession. Can I receive communion under most circumstances (not speaking of exceptions)?

This is really where the difference of the Eastern mind and Latin legalism comes out. Latin legalism says, “you do this, you get this, you need to do this before you can do this.” It all deals with absolutes. You commit a sin, you have that marked on your soul. And before you can receive Communion you need to go to Confession. No ifs, no buts.

In the Eastern mind, repentance is not entirely contained in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. It is an aid to it, but not its entirety. If you commit a sin and you are trully repentant and resolved to reform your life, then you can approach and receive. It doesn’t mean one who is actively a sinner can approach and receive. But if you are repentant, there is no requirement. Of course your spiritual father will tell you, “make a confession, pray, fast, do penance.” But as long as you are indeed contrite, Sacramental Confession is not mandatory. If you are an active sinner, like you sleep around and have no intention to repent, then of course you cannot approach.

 

[Vico]

I read some comments on another thread that disturbed me but since we hijacked the thread, I thought I’d start a new thread here.

I understand that Eastern Theology does not refer to “mortal sins”. I also understand, I think, that according to EC theology, all sin wounds our relationship with God.

I would like to understand if EC’s believe that one can receive communion with a serious or grave sin on his soul?

Thank you.

Never. At the very least, in grave circumstances only, only after repentance expressed with a perfect act of contrition occurs, which means an act of perfect love to God as above all else, and the intention to confess individually (which allows the assignment of a healing penance and help from a priest).

The Catholic Church determines what is acceptable for absolution of sin and has expressed it.

 

[Bookcat]

This is really where the difference of the Eastern mind and Latin legalism comes out. Latin legalism says, “you do this, you get this, you need to do this before you can do this.” It all deals with absolutes. You commit a sin, you have that marked on your soul. And before you can receive Communion you need to go to Confession. No ifs, no buts.

In the Eastern mind, repentance is not entirely contained in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. It is an aid to it, but not its entirety. If you commit a sin and you are trully repentant and resolved to reform your life, then you can approach and receive. It doesn’t mean one who is actively a sinner can approach and receive. But if you are repentant, there is no requirement. Of course your spiritual father will tell you, “make a confession, pray, fast, do penance.” .

In the Western mind repentance is ALSO not entirely contained in the Sacrament of Penance.

But either case – Occidental or Oriental – the same holds ground. If one commits a serious sin one is NOT to receive Holy Communion (as noted more fully in the Eastern and Western Codes of Canon Law)

So your understanding there is very much incorrect. Eastern or Western one is NOT to receive.

There IS the requirement of confession first. No matter how contrite one is.*

I refer readers to the Eastern Code of Canon Law, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Encyclical of Bl Pope John Paul II etc

(serious/grave exceptions have already been discussed…with their requirements)

 

[dzheremi]

The early Church considered deprivation of the Eucharist as a regular part of penitential practice, to enjoin in the penitent the seriousness of one’s sin. Yeah – even AFTER confession. Do you really think not communing while one has NOT confessed is in any way inappropriate? I think we gotta admit nothing in any of our Churches today (CCC, OOC, or EOC) can compare to the penitential attitude enjoined by the early Fathers of the Church.

Blessings,
Marduk

I think you’re reading something into my post that isn’t there. I never wrote that not communing while one has not confessed is inappropriate. It is a matter for me of adjusting to a mindset that is different than the understanding of this subject that I had been previously been encouraged to form.

And you speak only for yourself with the “nothing in any of our churches today can compare to the early Fathers” comment. I suppose maybe if you see the “penitential attitude” as reflected primarily in the degree of punishment or censure or withholding (whatever you’d call it), then maybe, but I think that’s kind of a slap in the face to the Fathers, particularly coming from a Copt such as yourself. Do you forget so quickly the story of St. Moses the Black and the trail of sand? I don’t think the moral there was “look at how strict our punishment should be, to REALLY drive home the point that such-and-such an action is bad”.

 

[mardukm]

I think you’re reading something into my post that isn’t there. I never wrote that not communing while one has not confessed is inappropriate. It is a matter for me of adjusting to a mindset that is different than the understanding of this subject that I had been previously been encouraged to form.

Sorry if I misunderstood.

And you speak only for yourself with the “nothing in any of our churches today can compare to the early Fathers” comment. I suppose maybe if you see the “penitential attitude” as reflected primarily in the degree of punishment or censure or withholding (whatever you’d call it), then maybe, but I think that’s kind of a slap in the face to the Fathers, particularly coming from a Copt such as yourself. Do you forget so quickly the story of St. Moses the Black and the trail of sand? I don’t think the moral there was “look at how strict our punishment should be, to REALLY drive home the point that such-and-such an action is bad”.

Oops! I meant “penitential praxis,” not “penitential attitude.”

Not sure what the story of St. Moses has to do with this. IIRC, the point of that episode was that we should not judge others so harshly.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[dzheremi]

the point of that episode was that we should not judge others so harshly.

Exactly…that is the point. That’s entirely why I brought it up, as you had praised the Fathers (rightly, but with a wrong appraisal of today’s practice) for the strictness of their penitential practice. Well, here is St. Moses telling us not to glory in that, and he is far from the only one to do so.

 

[TrueLight]

Any other EC’s want to weigh in on the original question?

 

[TrueLight]

If EC’s truly believe that one can receive with a grave sin without reconciliation and if that is okay with the magesterium, then the policy should be applied equally across the Catholic Church.

That doesn’t help my faith, honestly.