Liturgy of the Word vs Of the Eucharist

[CatholicSooner]

I have been praying about and wrestling around with my thoughts on the church teaching of not receiving communion while living in a state of grave sin.

On one hand I totally understand and agree with church teaching. On the other hand, I am saddened that those living in mortal sin cannot receive the grace of God through the eucharist.

I have been taught, rightly or wrongly, that we receive God through the Eucharist AND the word during mass. So why is it permissible to receive God through the liturgy of the word but not the Eucharist while living in mortal sin?

Also, while writing this, I am reminded of the gospels when Jesus was asked about divorce and Moses allowing divorce in particular. It’s obvious that divorce is not a part of God’s plan but that Moses allowed it under certain circumstances.

So from that, it’s quite obvious, that God will let certain prophets or key religious figures (now obviously the apostles—>pope/bishops) the authority to deviate from his plan if they deem it necessary.

So will most people be up in arms if the cardinals decide to be less strict on divorced Catholics regarding the eucharist or will they undesrtand the power that the Church has and their ability to Bind and Loose?

 

[GLam8833]

The Magisterium doesn’t restrict a person from
partaking in the Liturgy of the Mass, but only
the partaking of the Eucharist while in mortal
sin. Also, about deviating from the Spiritual
precepts is NOT scriptural, nor GOD’S way,
It is man’s design, please don’t bend the
righteous will of God to suit your own prefer-
ences!

 

[CatholicSooner]

The Magisterium doesn’t restrict a person from
partaking in the Liturgy of the Mass, but only
the partaking of the Eucharist while in mortal
sin.

Well yeah, I know. That is why I started this thread. Why can we receive the Lord in the scripture but not in the Eucharist if living in mortal sin?

Also, about deviating from the Spiritual
precepts is NOT scriptural, nor GOD’S way,
It is man’s design, please don’t bend the
righteous will of God to suit your own prefer-
ences!

What preference would that be? I’m not trying to bend anything but asking questions to get better understanding. I am not deviating from anything. Tell me what is not true that I stated.

 

[smead2942]

Why can we receive the Lord in the scripture but not in the Eucharist if living in mortal sin?

I would say, because when we receive the Lord in the Eucharist we LITERALLY, PHYSICALLY, WHOLLY receive His Body, Blood, Soul & Divinity. No doubt we receive God’s grace through the Sacred Scriptures, but the Eucharist is on a different level. It’s blasphemy to receive Jesus’ body and precious blood if living in mortal sin, it’s not blasphemy to read a divinely-inspired book. IMO

 

[CatholicSooner]

I would say, because when we receive the Lord in the Eucharist we LITERALLY, PHYSICALLY, WHOLLY receive His Body, Blood, Soul & Divinity. No doubt we receive God’s grace through the Sacred Scriptures, but the Eucharist is on a different level. It’s blasphemy to receive Jesus’ body and precious blood if living in mortal sin, it’s not blasphemy to read a divinely-inspired book. IMO

This makes total sense thanks.

I guess the issue is HOW we receive God in the Liturgy of the Word. I was told by one priest we physically receive him

 

[dans0622]

Well yeah, I know. That is why I started this thread. Why can we receive the Lord in the scripture but not in the Eucharist if living in mortal sin?
…

Hello,

If a person is living in mortal sin, would he actually receive the Lord in any manner or from any source? It seems he has to be forgiven of the sin first and then he can receive the Lord in any and all ways. If there is the question of a “public sin”, however, he should do so in a way that removes the possibility of scandal.

Dan

 

[Neofight]

The Magisterium doesn’t restrict a person from
partaking in the Liturgy of the Mass, but only
the partaking of the Eucharist while in mortal
sin. Also, about deviating from the Spiritual
precepts is NOT scriptural, nor GOD’S way,
It is man’s design, please don’t bend the
righteous will of God to suit your own prefer-
ences!

The Magisterium condemns, not restricts, receiving the Eucharist. Only the individual’s desire to suppress the free-will which enables one to commit this act keeps a person in mortal sin from receiving.

Odds are that a large number receiving on any given day, are in mortal sin, and the Magisterium can’t control their actions.

 

[M-Dent]

Dan,

If a person is living in mortal sin, would he actually receive the Lord in any manner or from any source? It seems he has to be forgiven of the sin first and then he can receive the Lord in any and all ways. If there is the question of a “public sin”, however, he should do so in a way that removes the possibility of scandal.

Could it not be understood as actual grace meant to convince us of sin and to convert our heart?

If we have lost sanctifying grace (by mortal sin) we cannot (by our own natural powers) do anything alone. We need to cooperate with the Holy Spirit which us Catholics would agree would lead us to the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation.

The Word of God seems a normative means for such?

**CCC 1848 **
As St. Paul affirms, “Where sin increased, grace abounded all the more.” But to do its work grace must uncover sin so as to convert our hearts and bestow on us “righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Like a physician who probes the wound before treating it, God, by his Word and by his Spirit, casts a living light on sin:

Conversion requires convincing of sin; it includes the interior judgment of conscience, and this, being a proof of the action of the Spirit of truth in man’s inmost being, becomes at the same time the start of a new grant of grace and love: “Receive the Holy Spirit.” Thus in this “convincing concerning sin” we discover a double gift: the gift of the truth of conscience and the gift of the certainty of redemption. The Spirit of truth is the Consoler.

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a8.htm

 

[TimothyH]

Grace is an action of the Holy Spirit. It is our own sin which prevents sanctifying grace from acting on our souls. Our souls cannot respond to the action of the Holy Spirit when we are in a state of sin. It is not possible.

The Church isn’t preventing anything. On the contrary, the Church is protecting us.

-Tim-

 

[porthos11]

I have been praying about and wrestling around with my thoughts on the church teaching of not receiving communion while living in a state of grave sin.

On one hand I totally understand and agree with church teaching. On the other hand, I am saddened that those living in mortal sin cannot receive the grace of God through the eucharist.

I have been taught, rightly or wrongly, that we receive God through the Eucharist AND the word during mass. So why is it permissible to receive God through the liturgy of the word but not the Eucharist while living in mortal sin?

Also, while writing this, I am reminded of the gospels when Jesus was asked about divorce and Moses allowing divorce in particular. It’s obvious that divorce is not a part of God’s plan but that Moses allowed it under certain circumstances.

So from that, it’s quite obvious, that God will let certain prophets or key religious figures (now obviously the apostles—>pope/bishops) the authority to deviate from his plan if they deem it necessary.

So will most people be up in arms if the cardinals decide to be less strict on divorced Catholics regarding the eucharist or will they undesrtand the power that the Church has and their ability to Bind and Loose?

The issue is not divorced Catholics. It’s those divorced AND REMARRIED outside the Church. Divorce does not bar one from Communion, and it never has. Adultery does.

The reason why one can receive Jesus in the Word and through spiritual communion even in mortal sin (and they should so that they can dispose themselves to receive actual grace), and not in the Eucharist is because the Eucharist is a Sacrament, and the other two are not. Specifically, the Eucharist is a Sacrament of the Living, and receiving it, the other four Sacraments of the Living in a state of mortal sin is sacrilege. Sacraments of the Living can be worthily received only in the state of grace.

The only two Sacraments that can be received in mortal sin are the two Sacraments of the Dead: Baptism and Reconciliation.

 

[Cat]

Romans 10:17–Faith come from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ."

It is often through the Word of God that people even know they are in mortal sin and what to do about it.

Of course we receive the Word of God physically–we have to use our ears to hear it and our brains to process it. That’s a physical reception.

 

[otjm]

I would say, because when we receive the Lord in the Eucharist we LITERALLY, PHYSICALLY, WHOLLY receive His Body, Blood, Soul & Divinity. No doubt we receive God’s grace through the Sacred Scriptures, but the Eucharist is on a different level. It’s blasphemy to receive Jesus’ body and precious blood if living in mortal sin, it’s not blasphemy to read a divinely-inspired book. IMO

I think you mean sacrilege.

Blasphemy is speech; and it may be sacrilegious speech.

So: blasphemy may be a sacrilege, but not all sacrileges are blasphemy.

 

[commenter]

I have been taught, rightly or wrongly, that we receive God through the Eucharist AND the word during mass. So why is it permissible to receive God through the liturgy of the word but not the Eucharist while living in mortal sin?

Even non-Christians receive the Word of God. That’s part of the way they, and Christian children, and all the rest of us, even when we are in sin, are prepared for Christian life, including the Eucharist. But another part of the preparation for the Eucharist is Confession. People living in grave sin will be far happier if they stop bypassing the sacrament Christ provides for just that healing. (I think the greatest scandal of the past 45 years is that so few priests and Catholic laity encourage frequent reception of THIS sacrament.)

Also, while writing this, I am reminded of the gospels when Jesus was asked about divorce and Moses allowing divorce in particular. It’s obvious that divorce is not a part of God’s plan but that Moses allowed it under certain circumstances.

So from that, it’s quite obvious, that God will let certain prophets or key religious figures (now obviously the apostles—>pope/bishops) the authority to deviate from his plan if they deem it necessary.

There are some doctors today who refuse to accept smokers as new patients unless they are willing to actively try to quit. This sounds cruel in a way, since those people need medical care as much, or more, than others. I’m sure those patients will find other doctors, looking for new business, who will accommodate those who insist on their right to smoke.

A similar “accommodation” is happening as most Protestant churches, including supposedly “evangelical” ones, have repudiated their own Protestant traditions on marriage in an effort to recruit new members. No confessional needed. Their “key religious figures” have moved beyond divorce/remarriage, to other accommodations. There’s more coming.

This is not love. This is not the Catholic Church.

 

[wonka3178]

I struggle with grave sin myself. According to my confessors (all of them), as long as I receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation often, I may receive communion. How often is often? According to my confessors often enough is every four to six weeks. I know people who live in sin that go to Mass every Sunday and receive communion because they go to confession every four weeks. One may say that if one lives in sin, he makes no effort to uproot himself from sin, but you and I both know that is not true. Only by God’s grace can we be saved from sin, and that is what the Sacraments are for (all of them).