Must we recieve Communion at Mass?

[dnar]

I was reading through the Ask an Apologist forum and I stumbled upon a question about a man asking if his wife should receive Communion.

Father Vincent Serpa answered as this:

“So long as we are in the state of grace, it is an insult to the Lord to disregard His offer of intimacy when He suffered so that we might have it!”

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=431964

I haven’t been taught this yet in RCIA. I never knew we “HAD” to receive or we were ‘insulting’ our Lord.

I tried to ask this follow up question in Ask an Apologist forum, but as usual my question never gets answered, only the ones that repeat themselves and we get to see links all day from some bot.

I was told we only had to receive once a year, and never was told I was insulting Jesus if I did not.

Thanks.

 

[Moscati]

What the Catechism says is:

1389 The Church obliges the faithful to take part in the Divine Liturgy on Sundays and feast days and, prepared by the sacrament of Reconciliation, to receive the Eucharist at least once a year, if possible during the Easter season.224 But the Church strongly encourages the faithful to receive the holy Eucharist on Sundays and feast days, or more often still, even daily.

I think the way Fr. Serpa put it was a bit of hyperbole, but he’s trying to convey how important the Eucharist is.

 

[prodigalson12]

Well, if you are understanding of the participation, each time you are getting a little closer to Jesus, you are opening your heart to our lord, reaffirming your desire to be closer to him, and this process does happen in a very real way, a true bonding in more then one way. The desire to do this should inherently by default come from your being, not deferred into a luke warm state of indifference. I think the rule of at least one year, where in cases you are in such a remote area, it takes a pilgrimage just to attend mass once a year is where the one a year rule is taking more relevant notational context.

 

[SMHW]

I was told we only had to receive once a year, and never was told I was insulting Jesus if I did not.

I agree with the previous poster who said Fr. Sherpa was using a bit of hyperbole. I think the point is that we should receive whenever we reasonably can. We must be in a state of grace, we need to observe the pre-communion fast, and we ought to have the proper disposition.

But we are incapable of ever truly having the proper disposition. So unless receiving ends up being an occasion of sin for us we ought to humbly accept Jesus’ gift.

 

[thistle]

I was reading through the Ask an Apologist forum and I stumbled upon a question about a man asking if his wife should receive Communion.

Father Vincent Serpa answered as this:

“So long as we are in the state of grace, it is an insult to the Lord to disregard His offer of intimacy when He suffered so that we might have it!”

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=431964

I haven’t been taught this yet in RCIA. I never knew we “HAD” to receive or we were ‘insulting’ our Lord.

I tried to ask this follow up question in Ask an Apologist forum, but as usual my question never gets answered, only the ones that repeat themselves and we get to see links all day from some bot.

I was told we only had to receive once a year, and never was told I was insulting Jesus if I did not.

Thanks.

Apart from once a year as pointed out by the other posters we are not obliged to receive when we attend Mass. However, if we are in a state of grace and properly disposed to receive why would anyone refuse to do so? In such a situation it does not make sense for someone not to receive.

 

[ProVobis]

I was told we only had to receive once a year, and never was told I was insulting Jesus if I did not.

You were told correctly.

The Church teaching is that you are to receive only if you are properly disposed. And proper disposition isn’t limited to fasting and being sin-free either. If you’ve just had a major disagreement with your spouse, for example, I can’t see you fully atuned to reception of the sacrament. So where’s the insult against Jesus if you choose to postpone receiving of the sacrament because you prefer to receive most worthily?

 

[BlazingBolt]

If you can receive, and are at Mass, what possible reason would you have not to receive?

You go though the entire Mass and then your like “meh, I just don’t feel like it right now Lord, maybe later…”

They are not passing out cookies…would you like a cookie…nah not right now…

 

[stuart12]

Father’s response was appropriate if you notice the reason why the woman did not want to receive Holy Communion. She didn’t feel worthy to receive our Lord. No one is worthy to receive Jesus, but there is a huge difference between being simply unworthy and unworthy because of mortal sin.

The woman seems to have a problem trusting God’s mercy and therefore does not approach the Sacrament. However, the Eucharist is there to bring us in closer union with the One Who died for us.

 

[Pakesh]

You were told correctly.

T. If you’ve just had a major disagreement with your spouse, for example, I can’t see you fully atuned to reception of the sacrament. So where’s the insult against Jesus if you choose to postpone receiving of the sacrament because you prefer to receive most worthily?

I find the bolded part of your statement interesting…Could you elaborate more? Unless you are in a state of Mortal Sin, you can receive the Eucharist. As far as the OP, my question is, why wouldn’t you want to receive the Lord at Mass!? The Eucharist is the source and summit of Christian Life. What a truly Sublime Gift the Lord gives us. The once a year rule seems to really apply in really rural areas and in extreme circumstances though. Personally, if I didn’t “want” to receive our Lord at every Mass, I would have to pray and wonder what I believe in my heart about the Real Presence.

 

[SMHW]

Father’s response was appropriate if you notice the reason why the woman did not want to receive Holy Communion. She didn’t feel worthy to receive our Lord. No one is worthy to receive Jesus, but there is a huge difference between being simply unworthy and unworthy because of mortal sin.

The woman seems to have a problem trusting God’s mercy and therefore does not approach the Sacrament. However, the Eucharist is there to bring us in closer union with the One Who died for us.

Exactly!

My aunt used to call this “reverse pride”. —the idea that you are so humble because even though you haven’t done something perfectly you believe you are quite capable of doing it perfectly.

We want to be “reasonably” well disposed when we receive communion but we will never be as well disposed as we should. Those of a somewhat scrupulous nature probably need to set the bar for “well disposed” at a much lower level. Otherwise they are creating a “self-fulfilling prophesy” of sorts: they will become unworthy — due to pride.

 

[jmcrae]

G. K. Chesterton once said something to the effect that, if something is important enough to do, it is important enough to do badly.

His point was that, when it comes to the Sacraments, we must not wait until we have become “experts” - we need to take those stumbling first steps, and gain the experience needed to become better at them.

 

[PatriceA]

If I continually invite you over to my house for a meal, but you come and continually decline my offerings, don’t you think at some point I’m going to be hurt and offended?

If you are in the state of grace to receive communion, why would you reject it? I can see how it would offend Jesus.

 

[aspirant]

If you can receive, and are at Mass, what possible reason would you have not to receive?

My thoughts exactly.

 

[ProVobis]

.Could you elaborate more? Unless you are in a state of Mortal Sin, you can receive the Eucharist. As far as the OP, my question is, why wouldn’t you want to receive the Lord at Mass!?

As I said, if you’re properly disposed, you are free to receive communion. And you’re also free to be so curious as to why those around you don’t receive, but I find it very offensive to force someone to receive communion or cookies, for that matter. Maybe they’ve already received or don’t want to be on tv or on camera, for example. There is no teaching of the Church that says one must receive communion every chance he gets, except once during Eastertime. And I think it’s way out of line to say Christ is offended when people don’t receive. Do they know better than Christ when His Church says it’s not necessary?

 

[ProVobis]

Otherwise they are creating a “self-fulfilling prophesy” of sorts: they will become unworthy — due to pride.

I think you’re mistaking pride with humility. It is pride to say the sin you’ve committed isn’t that serious to be a mortal sin. It’s humility to say the sin you’ve commited is worse than it is. Worthiness is somewhere in the middle and can only be determined by you and no one else. There shouldn’t be any downsides to receiving communion, but we all know that receiving with a serious (or what you feel is serious) stain on your soul is a sacrilege and another stain on your soul and not a sacrament at all.

 

[ProVobis]

If I continually invite you over to my house for a meal, but you come and continually decline my offerings, don’t you think at some point I’m going to be hurt and offended?

Ever heard of the Prodigal Son?

 

[ProVobis]

They are not passing out cookies…would you like a cookie…nah not right now…

Poor analogy. Most cookies are loaded with transfats and will clog your arteries.

(You can tell I’m no fun at parties.)

 

[PatriceA]

Ever heard of the Prodigal Son?

I must be missing your point. Please explain.

 

[jmcrae]

I think you’re mistaking pride with humility. It is pride to say the sin you’ve committed isn’t that serious to be a mortal sin. It’s humility to say the sin you’ve commited is worse than it is.

No, that’s not humility. Humility is to say the truth, whatever it may be. It is a form of false pride to say that you are not as good as you know you are - worse, it’s like fishing for compliments.

There shouldn’t be any downsides to receiving communion, but we all know that receiving with a serious (or what you feel is serious) stain on your soul is a sacrilege and another stain on your soul and not a sacrament at all.

No one was suggesting that anyone receive unworthily. Just that it is false pride to play at being “more holy than all those others” because they don’t receive when they are even just a little bit out of sorts, as if it were normal or even possible to be in the state of perfection any time Holy Communion is available - sort of “Oh, poor me, I’m not in the state of perfection, so I can’t receive, and hey, what are you doing receiving, I saw you speaking to your child at the start of Mass instead of making the sign of the Cross in perfect time with the priest, looky looky, I have higher standards than you” kind of thing.

 

[SMHW]

I think you’re mistaking pride with humility.

No I don’t think so.

It is pride to say the sin you’ve committed isn’t that serious to be a mortal sin. It’s humility to say the sin you’ve commited is worse than it is.

No. I think both are pride. Humility is recognizing and accepting the truth about ourselves: God given strengths and weaknesses, the good that we do (through God’s grace) and the evil that we perpetrate. Remember that this particular thread was inspired by a woman who is apparently prone to scrupulosity. Scrupulous people tend to have higher expectations of of the good they can and should do than does God. Such people see tend to place their own desire for heroic worthiness above God’s capacity to accept us for who we are and forgive us. And that is really a form of pride.

Worthiness is somewhere in the middle and can only be determined by you and no one else. There shouldn’t be any downsides to receiving communion, but we all know that receiving with a serious (or what you feel is serious) stain on your soul is a sacrilege and another stain on your soul and not a sacrament at all.

I agree with most of this except the part about worthiness being between pride and humility. (If that is what you actually meant to say.) Our worthiness to receive is ultimately because God has made us so rather than because of anything we do or do not do. As I stated in a previous post, we need to be in a state of grace and have the proper disposition. But that disposition should be formed with the knowledge that worthiness comes from God, not from within ourselves.