J
jrs88
Guest
Or is that not permitted?
I don’t think that it is permissable, except for a priest who is celebrating more than one Mass. I am not sure why, though.Or is that not permitted?
Can. 917 A person who has already received the Most Holy Eucharist can receive it a second time on the same day only within the eucharistic celebration in which the person participates, without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 921, §2.
Can. 921 §1. The Christian faithful who are in danger of death from any cause are to be nourished by holy communion in the form of Viaticum.
It’s permitted. Here’s the English translation of the relevant canon law:Or is that not permitted?
I have always been led to believe that this is speaking in reference to those “participating” in the Mass, i.e. clergy, EMHC’s, lectors, musicians, etc. and not meant for those simply attending Mass (I know that they are participating also, but this is in a distinctly differenct manner).Can. 917 A person who has already received the Most Holy Eucharist can receive it a second time on the same day only within the eucharistic celebration in which the person participates, without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 921, §2.
No, this is mistaken. You would not say that all the faithful are obliged to act as *“clergy, EMHC’s, lectors, musicians, etc.” *would you? cf.I have always been led to believe that this is speaking in reference to those “participating” in the Mass, i.e. clergy, EMHC’s, lectors, musicians, etc. and not meant for those simply attending Mass (I know that they are participating also, but this is in a distinctly differenct manner).
teeCan. 1247 On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are obliged to participate in the Mass.
dcndave appears to be a charismatic espiscopalean according to his profile, so I’m not sure you should worry to much about his doctrinal pronouncements!What makes you say so?
tee
OK, is there a compelling reason to receive twice in a single day?No, this is mistaken. You would not say that all the faithful are obliged to act as *“clergy, EMHC’s, lectors, musicians, etc.” *would you? cf.
tee
Once a month we have the ER in our Deanery. I still go to family Mass in the morning, but then take my sons to the ER in the afternoon. I was concerned about receiving communion twice, but asked several priests and was told it was OK!OK, is there a compelling reason to receive twice in a single day?
Do you consider that there is a “compelling” reason for a layman to receive even once in a day? If so, does this same reason suffice compel a second reception? Or to dispel one?OK, is there a compelling reason to receive twice in a single day?
Um…ER…?Once a month we have the ER in our Deanery. I still go to family Mass in the morning, but then take my sons to the ER in the afternoon. I was concerned about receiving communion twice, but asked several priests and was told it was OK!![]()
I’m trying to figure that out too. I wonder if they meant RE, Religious Education.Um…ER…?
tee
Yes, that wording had been confusing me a little bit. Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by jkarp
I have always been led to believe that this is speaking in reference to those “participating” in the Mass, i.e. clergy, EMHC’s, lectors, musicians, etc. and not meant for those simply attending Mass (I know that they are participating also, but this is in a distinctly differenct manner).
No, this is mistaken. You would not say that all the faithful are obliged to act as *“clergy, EMHC’s, lectors, musicians, etc.” *would you? cf.
Quote:
Can. 1247 On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are obliged to participate in the Mass.
tee