Is the real issue all about frequent holy communion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gorgonius
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Gorgonius

Guest
With the controversy about Amoris Laetitia, I’ve been thinking that the appropriateness of frequent holy communion for all members of the faithful might be the real issue behind initiatives to permit those in civil marriages to receive the Blessed Sacrament. Is this initiative under the present Pope in the name of mercy an unattended consequence of Pope St Pius X’s initiative to encourage frequent holy communion which has taken 100 years to emerge?

In previous generations, attendance at Mass without receiving holy communion by the faithful was common, and sometimes the general custom, due to rigorous fasting rules and the expectation that the faithful would have previously received sacramental absolution.

I understand that for most of Catholic history, the faithful would attend Mass weekly but receive holy communion two or three times a year and make a thorough spiritual preparation for reception of the Sacrament. This remains the custom among our Orthodox sisters and brothers…

Nowadays those who do not receive holy communion are in the minority at the Masses I attend. With the sacrificial nature of the Mass de-emphasised and the communal meal aspect highlighted in the Novus Ordo, has this resulted in social pressure to receive holy communion so as not to feel separated from the worshipping community, with little or no consideration given to the required personal dispositions?
 
With the controversy about Amoris Laetitia, I’ve been thinking that the appropriateness of frequent holy communion for all members of the faithful might be the real issue behind** initiatives to permit those in civil marriages to receive the Blessed Sacrament**. Is this initiative under the present Pope in the name of mercy an unattended consequence of Pope St Pius X’s initiative to encourage frequent holy communion which has taken 100 years to emerge?

In previous generations, attendance at Mass without receiving holy communion by the faithful was common, and sometimes the general custom, due to rigorous fasting rules and the expectation that the faithful would have previously received sacramental absolution.

I understand that for most of Catholic history, the faithful would attend Mass weekly but receive holy communion two or three times a year and make a thorough spiritual preparation for reception of the Sacrament. This remains the custom among our Orthodox sisters and brothers…

Nowadays those who do not receive holy communion are in the minority at the Masses I attend. With the sacrificial nature of the Mass de-emphasised and the communal meal aspect highlighted in the Novus Ordo, has this resulted in social pressure to receive holy communion so as not to feel separated from the worshipping community, with little or no consideration given to the required personal dispositions?
Those in a state of mortal sin will not be permitted to receive Communion. That is an infallible teaching.
 
With the controversy about Amoris Laetitia, I’ve been thinking that the appropriateness of frequent holy communion for all members of the faithful might be the real issue behind initiatives to permit those in civil marriages to receive the Blessed Sacrament. Is this initiative under the present Pope in the name of mercy an unattended consequence of Pope St Pius X’s initiative to encourage frequent holy communion which has taken 100 years to emerge?

In previous generations, attendance at Mass without receiving holy communion by the faithful was common, and sometimes the general custom, due to rigorous fasting rules and the expectation that the faithful would have previously received sacramental absolution.

I understand that for most of Catholic history, the faithful would attend Mass weekly but receive holy communion two or three times a year and make a thorough spiritual preparation for reception of the Sacrament. This remains the custom among our Orthodox sisters and brothers…

Nowadays those who do not receive holy communion are in the minority at the Masses I attend. With the sacrificial nature of the Mass de-emphasised and the communal meal aspect highlighted in the Novus Ordo, has this resulted in social pressure to receive holy communion so as not to feel separated from the worshipping community, with little or no consideration given to the required personal dispositions?
There is the portion of the Mass prior to the Homily and the portion of the Mass after the Homily. In early Christian era, the catechumens were not present for the Communion.

The sacrament of the Eucharist is essentially different from the Sacrifice of the Mass since the sacrament is intended privately for the sanctification of the soul, but the sacrifice serves primarily to glorify God by adoration, thanksgiving, prayer, and expiation. The Holy sacrifice of the Mass, “sacrifice of praise,” spiritual sacrifice, pure and holy sacrifice, is the offering of the Church.

Man receives the sacrament for his own good, and it is called the Holy Communion, because by this sacrament we unite ourselves to Christ.

God receives the sacrifice of His only-begotten Son.
 
Nowadays those who do not receive holy communion are in the minority at the Masses I attend. With the sacrificial nature of the Mass de-emphasised and the communal meal aspect highlighted in the Novus Ordo, has this resulted in social pressure to receive holy communion so as not to feel separated from the worshipping community, with little or no consideration given to the required personal dispositions?
That is part of the problem. There has been a big shift which we see reflected in many posts on this site.

Back when Communion was received at the rail, and even for the first couple of years of receiving standing and in the hand, there was no particular order in which one went to receive. Lady in the centre of the 5th pew went when she felt ready and the rest of the pew didn’t go up at all. Three people in row 15 went up right at the beginning while another waited until the very end. It was perfectly normal. Nobody cared if they had to get up from kneeling in prayer so their pew mate could go up and receive.

Now we’re seeing posts that say that someone felt they had to go up and receive so as to not disrupt the flow. Who cares about “flow” when there is a possibility of committing a sacrilege?
 
With the controversy about Amoris Laetitia, I’ve been thinking that the appropriateness of frequent holy communion for all members of the faithful might be the real issue behind initiatives to permit those in civil marriages to receive the Blessed Sacrament. Is this initiative under the present Pope in the name of mercy an unattended consequence of Pope St Pius X’s initiative to encourage frequent holy communion which has taken 100 years to emerge?

In previous generations, attendance at Mass without receiving holy communion by the faithful was common, and sometimes the general custom, due to rigorous fasting rules and the expectation that the faithful would have previously received sacramental absolution.

I understand that for most of Catholic history, the faithful would attend Mass weekly but receive holy communion two or three times a year and make a thorough spiritual preparation for reception of the Sacrament. This remains the custom among our Orthodox sisters and brothers…

Nowadays those who do not receive holy communion are in the minority at the Masses I attend. With the sacrificial nature of the Mass de-emphasised and the communal meal aspect highlighted in the Novus Ordo, has this resulted in social pressure to receive holy communion so as not to feel separated from the worshipping community, with little or no consideration given to the required personal dispositions?
I suppose it’s possible that this could be a contributing factor, although there have been so many social and cultural changes since the past century that I think it would be difficult to isolate how much of these difficulties — if any — can be attributed to this particular cause. Correlation does not prove causation, as they say.

Personally I have experienced a great deal of grace in my life from the frequent reception of Holy Communion. There will be some weeks where I abstain due to being improperly disposes, and I do try to make frequent confession a part of my spiritual journey. If what you were suggesting is true, does the evil resulting from the abuse of this practice cancel out the grace from its proper use?
 
Nowadays those who do not receive holy communion are in the minority at the Masses I attend. With the sacrificial nature of the Mass de-emphasised and the communal meal aspect highlighted in the Novus Ordo, has this resulted in social pressure to receive holy communion so as not to feel separated from the worshipping community, with little or no consideration given to the required personal dispositions?
Yes, I think even those aware of the “rule” feel like they might as well go up because everyone else is. Communion seems to be approached in a much more Protestant way than it used to be.
 
I go to Mass every Sunday & Holy days of obligation. Also, a lot of prayer group masses. I only receive communion when I have gone to confession the day before or were very good for a few days.
This comes out to maybe 20 or so communions a year.

I know some people in my parish who tell me they haven’t gone to confession in 10 or 15 years but they receive communion every week. I know it’s a mortal sin not to confess during the Easter time…🤷
 
I go to Mass every Sunday & Holy days of obligation. Also, a lot of prayer group masses. I only receive communion when I have gone to confession the day before or were very good for a few days.
This comes out to maybe 20 or so communions a year.

I know some people in my parish who tell me they haven’t gone to confession in 10 or 15 years but they receive communion every week.** I know it’s a mortal sin not to confess during the Easter time**…🤷
Probably should be clarified that in order to be mortal, one needs an awareness that the sin is a grave matter.
 
I go to Mass every Sunday & Holy days of obligation. Also, a lot of prayer group masses. I only receive communion when I have gone to confession the day before or were very good for a few days.
This comes out to maybe 20 or so communions a year.

I know some people in my parish who tell me they haven’t gone to confession in 10 or 15 years but they receive communion every week. I know it’s a mortal sin not to confess during the Easter time…:shrug:
I know what you mean. In my first parish I would see people who openly acknowledged living in a manner that would be considered a mortal sin but yet receive communion or even worse act as a EMHC.
 
I go to Mass every Sunday & Holy days of obligation. Also, a lot of prayer group masses. I only receive communion when I have gone to confession the day before or were very good for a few days.
This comes out to maybe 20 or so communions a year.

I know some people in my parish who tell me they haven’t gone to confession in 10 or 15 years but they receive communion every week. I know it’s a mortal sin not to confess during the Easter time…🤷
My story is similar to yours.

When I am not worthy to receive, I just sit at the end of the aisle. That makes it easy to move out of the way of others as they go up to receive Holy Communion.
 
Red herring. The ordinary form does no such thing.
I agree. The Ordinary Form is not the problem. Christ’s sacrifice is still very clear.

Now de-emphasis of the importance of Confession (including the awkwardness of showing up on a Saturday during Confession hour to an empty church) probably has a lot to do with it. I personally think that more frequent penitential services (with option for Reconcilation afterwards with a Priest) would help the issue. I know personally I find it easier to go to Confession when I feel like the Priest is hearing from a lot of people that day (the thought of calling Father up for a one on one appointment instills shear terror 😊). I’m sure I’m not the only person that feels that way. I also don’t know if everyone views mortal sin the same way. I think some people figure if they didn’t kill anyone, they’re good to go.
 
Red herring. The ordinary form does no such thing.
I think it does. Quite deliberately. This isn’t intended as a criticism. I prefer a well celebrated Novus Ordo to the Tridentine Mass… but the new missal definitely does emphasize the sacred meal aspect of the Mass more than the old missal does. Mass is both a sacrifice and a sacred meal. The sacrificial element is still very much there in the new missal, but a renewed focus was given to the meal aspect.
 
I think it does. Quite deliberately. This isn’t intended as a criticism. I prefer a well celebrated Novus Ordo to the Tridentine Mass… but the new missal definitely does emphasize the sacred meal aspect of the Mass more than the old missal does. Mass is both a sacrifice and a sacred meal. The sacrificial element is still very much there in the new missal, but a renewed focus was given to the meal aspect.
Agreed. Simply read the offertory prayers of the current missal, then read the vastly different offertory prayers in the EF. There is no question about validity of either form, but it’s hard not to notice the sea-change in the offertory prayers, in terms of the sacrificial language.
 
Agreed. Simply read the offertory prayers of the current missal, then read the vastly different offertory prayers in the EF. There is no question about validity of either form, but it’s hard not to notice the sea-change in the offertory prayers, in terms of the sacrificial language.
I believe Cardinal Sarah has proposed including the traditional offertory prayers as an option in the Novus Ordo missal. That would be interesting. I would love to see those prayers sung in English.
 
I understand that for most of Catholic history, the faithful would attend Mass weekly but receive holy communion two or three times a year and make a thorough spiritual preparation for reception of the Sacrament. This remains the custom among our Orthodox sisters and brothers…
The Church has pretty much always recognized infrequent Communion is less than ideal. Even when it was common for the laity to receive communion rarely, sometimes even going years without receiving, the Church encouraged frequent (worthy) reception of Holy Communion. The Church obviously recognized infrequent Communion of the laity as a problem, so much so that a minimum requirement was established under pain of excommunication. The solution is not to discourage reception of Communion, but to encourage holiness through frequent Confession and frequent Communion. Both give necessary grace

As for the Orthodox, frequent Communion (and Confession) is officially encouraged, but the application of this practice varies widely, just as it has historically varied in the Catholic Church.
 
The Church has pretty much always recognized infrequent Communion is less than ideal. Even when it was common for the laity to receive communion rarely, sometimes even going years without receiving, the Church encouraged frequent (worthy) reception of Holy Communion. The Church obviously recognized infrequent Communion of the laity as a problem, so much so that a minimum requirement was established under pain of excommunication. The solution is not to discourage reception of Communion, but to encourage holiness through frequent Confession and frequent Communion. Both give necessary grace

As for the Orthodox, frequent Communion (and Confession) is officially encouraged, but the application of this practice varies widely, just as it has historically varied in the Catholic Church.
Yes, it varies. I have relatives who converted from Evangelicalism to Orthodoxy. They attend an all English OCA parish in Edmonton where weekly communion is, as far as I can tell, the norm. Of course the priest hears confessions every Sunday before the liturgy as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top