Question about the hour fast before receiving

[utah_rose]

For myself, I don’t remember anyone getting sick from observing the fast from midnight. But Sunday Masses were generally held early, and people had breakfast afterwards. At that time no parish I know of had a noon Mass. And of course, no one was forced to fast. You could certainly eat whenever you wanted; just don’t receive communion if the fast has been broken. Breaking the fast and not receiving communion was never a sin!

We went to Mass each morning and on First Friday’s and yes I do remember kids getting sick because it usually was at least 9:30 before breakfast! And kids receiving their First Communion did sometimes. We also had Ember days where adults had to fast. My mom worked nights and would get ill from this but she couldn’t get a dispensation either. The Church was a lot stricter then. When we went to the 3 hour fast it was great!

 

[peter26]

Chewing gum does not break the fast

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=141897

 

[guanophore]

Chewing gum does not break the fast

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=141897

Maybe Father was trying to discourage chewing it at Mass?

I think any of those things mentioned in the post to which you linked would interfere with the spiritual purpose of the discipline. I can’t imagine the Apostles using any of those at the last supper.

 

[peter26]

Chewing gum at Mass would be irreverent, though not necessarily a mortal sin and would not break the fast. Chewing gum within an hour of receiving but before arriving at the church is perfectly acceptable.

 

[JimG]

Okay, so no more fast from midnight. No more fast for 3 hours. We’ve got the fast down to one hour before communion! We can drink water right up until receiving. And we can chew gum! This is legalistic?

 

[guanophore]

Okay, so no more fast from midnight. No more fast for 3 hours. We’ve got the fast down to one hour before communion! We can drink water right up until receiving. And we can chew gum! This is legalistic?

I guess only if you ate a grape in there somewhere.

 

[Mordocai]

And that, I suggest, is presumption.

In a matter of honest uncertainty about God’s Will, to err on the side of God’s mercy is not presumption - it is making a decision to trust in that mercy. To err on the side of fear of sin, as would be the other choice, is scruples no?

 

[frangiuliano115]

Boy. We’re zipping right along.

The legalists on one side
The spiritualists or grace believers on the other.

How to catch up? Is it even necessary? Will one side ever convince the other?

ProVobis says I just made a case tor the 4 hr fast by bringing up how long it takes the stomach to be emptied. How silly do you think I am, ProVobis? Not silly enough to make a point on Your behalf!

You seem to have misunderstood the point.

If it takes the stomach 4 hours, WHY WAS THE RULE CHANGED ???

Does this mean rules CAN be changed? Well, which one was right? THIS one or the OLD one? One poster said they didn’t know back way when about the scientific fact that it took 4 hrs; but they knew when the changer was made!

Even Guanophore understands how preoccupation with this type of legalism can be damaging to ones spirituality! I applaude him - sooner or later he’ll understand my position. From which I will not distance myself.

dans0622 on no. 75, posted the reply to a question I asked way back at the beginning. WHY should there be any fasting at all?

When you tell catechism kids they can’t eat or drink anything an hour before communion you also have to explain why, or they won’t adhere. So dans0622 posted the correct explanation. I’m not even saying, as some assume, that i don’t follow the rule. I’m just trying to say, to other adult posters, that maybe it’s not so important if it’s 4 hours or 1 hour or the time it takes to get to it from the beginniing of Mass which is about 40 to 50 minutes. The important aspect is to do what post no. 75 says whether or not it’s 4 hrs, 1 hr, 40 minutes.

This is the difference between legalism and grace.

Legalism is my thinking I could ever do anything for GOD, the creator of the universe, except maybe give Him my heart.

Grace is God inviting me to His dinner table, as He also dined with sinners in Mathew’s home and elsewhere, even IF I had some grape 30 minutes before because HE knows I respect and honor and revere Him.

Many go up to communion, followed all the rules, and don’t even understand what they’re doing. There are people receiving the host who don’t believe it is the body and blood of Christ! We don’t allow protestants to receive in our church because to them it’s only a symbol. Alas, we have many in our midst who believe the same thing and they’re receiving every Sunday.

Maybe we should be concentrating on this more rather than on rules that most don’t understand anyway and get one no closer to God??

Just a thought.

Fran

 

[guanophore]

The legalists on one side
The spiritualists or grace believers on the other.

No, Fran. This is a false dichotomy that only exists in your mind. People whe are willing to submit to the rules imposed by our leaders, out of humility and obedience, are not lacking in spirituality, nor do they fail to believe in grace. On the contrary, I think it takes even more spirituality to obey a rule that one may not understand or appreciate.

You seem to have misunderstood the point.

Indeed.

  If it takes the stomach 4 hours, WHY WAS THE RULE CHANGED ???

Because it has nothing to do with how much food is in the stomach.

 Does this mean rules CAN be changed?  Well, which one was right?  THIS one or the OLD one?

You have claimed to be a Catholic Catechist, and you have claimed that you know the difference between doctrine, dogma, disciplines and canon laws. If this is true, why are you asking this question? I suspect it is not really a genuine query, but rather, an expression of rebellion.

Of course the rules can be changed.

Even Guanophore understands how preoccupation with this type of legalism can be damaging to ones spirituality! I applaude him - sooner or later he’ll understand my position. From which I will not distance myself.

Many of us here pray for the members daily, Fran. Some of us also fervently pray that God will provide us with catechists that will accurately present the faith. Perhaps the fact that you had to leave you position as catechist was an answer to prayer?

 a question I asked way back at the beginning.  WHY should there be any fasting at all?

When you tell catechism kids they can’t eat or drink anything an hour before communion you also have to explain why, or they won’t adhere. So dans0622 posted the correct explanation. I’m not even saying, as some assume, that i don’t follow the rule. I’m just trying to say, to other adult posters, that maybe it’s not so important if it’s 4 hours or 1 hour or the time it takes to get to it from the beginniing of Mass which is about 40 to 50 minutes. The important aspect is to do what post no. 75 says whether or not it’s 4 hrs, 1 hr, 40 minutes.

I can see how you would have trouble helping children to appreciate something that you have told us you think is “silly” and “crazy”.

This is the difference between legalism and grace.

Legalism is my thinking I could ever do anything for GOD, the creator of the universe, except maybe give Him my heart.

May God heal you of black and white thinking, Fran!

Fasting IS a way to give Jesus our hearts!

Grace is God inviting me to His dinner table, as He also dined with sinners in Mathew’s home and elsewhere, even IF I had some grape 30 minutes before because HE knows I respect and honor and revere Him.

Your behavior, of course, is between you and God. Your refusal to accept the discipline of the church only becomes a problem when you post this in a public forum, while identifying as a Catholic (it is misleading to people) and because you may not be able to teach catechumens to appreciate church discipline.

Many go up to communion, followed all the rules, and don't even understand what they're doing.  There are people receiving the host who don't believe it is the body and blood of Christ!   We don't allow protestants to receive in our church because to them it's only a symbol.  Alas, we have many in our midst who believe the same thing and they're receiving every Sunday.

Yes, it is tragic,and it weakens the Body of Christ. Our society would not be in so much trouble if Catholics acted according to our faith. But I don’t think blowing off aspects of the faith will help them.

Maybe we should be concentrating on this more rather than on rules that most don't understand anyway and get one no closer to God??

Fran, your heart is in the right place, but you are creating a separation that does not exist. The discipline is in place to help people concentrate more on getting closer to God. This is what we need to be teaching.

Just a thought.

Fran

Good thoughts, faulty methods.

 

[ProVobis]

In a matter of honest uncertainty about God’s Will, to err on the side of God’s mercy is not presumption - it is making a decision to trust in that mercy. To err on the side of fear of sin, as would be the other choice, is scruples no?

I guess that would depend on whether you believe more in a punishing God rather than a merciful God (or vice-versa). The argument on the fast-breaking seems to have taken us to a merciful-only God; are there theologians who agree with that position?

But let’s not confuse scruples with a good examination of conscience. We are sinners but we’ve become quite expert on rationalization, it seems. And of what value is Christianity to us if we fall into disbelief of sin altogether?

I don’t want to pursue this matter further here but going back to that post, it was the way it was worded that struck me.

.

 

[frangiuliano115]

I welcome you then, please to present to us something from the Catechism or other official church teaching that states it is not a mortal sin but okay. With all due respect all I have read on this thread are people’s opinions that it is okay to receive, all official church teachings I have read and some that have been linked here state otherwise. So just because you or I don’t understand how something could be a mortal sin doesn’t mean it isn’t.

I am not trying to be a Pharisee, obsessed about rules or constantly checking my watch during Mass. I am trying (and struggling) to be a good Catholic. I love Jesus deeply in the Eucharist and want to receive him worthily and follow the guidelines set forth by the church. I have, on occasion checked my watch at Mass. It’s not an obsession just a check of the time a few minutes before Communion that’s all.

It’s not easy! If I were to set up my own personal religion I could set, bend and interpret any and all rules the way I wanted but I am not a member of my own church I am a member of the Catholic church.

Look, I am the past queen of twisting Catholic church teaching to my liking. I used to believe that women should be priests, that there was nothing wrong with artificial contraception and other things and I still considered myself a good Catholic. Once I was able to embrace the church and ALL she teaches, even when it seemed difficult or even petty only then was I completely free because once you start making your own rules, exceptions and allowances, however small, it can get bad…just sayin’. God bless and thank you for an interesting discussion.

Hi Monicad,

I see you’re very sincere and are asking. I wish I had MORE TIME! Also, there’s a post of yours at the end - later.

I think your questions are very important. We’re all talking here and I wonder if we even really understand what we each mean. I’m being accused of not being a good catholic, breaking the rules, disseminating false doctrine, and the such.

Okay. Why it’s not a mortal sin:

These are the O.P.'s exact words:

just if I accidentally and without thinking picked up and ate a grape or something…

So what is mortal sin?
CCC no. 1855: “Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man **by a grave violation **of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to Him.”

CCC no. 1858: "For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: “Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate conssent.”

I leave it to you: Was the OP committing a mortal sin by accidentally and without thinking picking up a grape and eating it and the going to receive communion?

Was it a grave matter?
Were the three conditions required to make it a mortal sin present?

To say nothing of the fact that it happened probably at least 40 minutes prior to Mass since I’m sure she wasn’t eating in church.

No one here is trying to create their own church. I just think we could get a bit carried away at times. I’m just saying that we should get away from legalism and try out God’s grace. It works so much better. Try studying the Mosaic Covenant and then study the New Covenant. When you go to receive communion, the Priest just got through saying that This Is The Bread of the New and Everlasting Covenant. What does that mean??

No one here wants to twist church teachings. I know all about freedom:
You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.

So what is the truth? Jesus frees us from the FEAR of sin. That doesn’t mean we should sin. We also shouldn’t be walking around all day wondering if we’re sinning and worrying that we’ll sin, and terrified of hell. Jesus is there FOR us.

Grace does not mean that you should believe women should be priests or that contraception is okay or abortion or SSM. I fear some posters here may think that this is what it means. Nothing could be further from the truth - because rules are not used to follow Jesus, but Love. Love makes you follow all rules. Remember Jesus two commandments?
Mathew 22:37
“Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind…And love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and prophets hang on these two commandments.”

So you see, I am following the rules, but not because I want to follow rules. Jesus said I Have Not Come To Abolish The Law, But To Fulfill It. So the Law is not abolished. But how do we keep the law? By loving God. By remembering His sacrifice for us. By trusting in Him and the sacrifice He made for us, by trustiing that he will not abandon us because we ate some grape some time before communion.

I see you have another post. Will check it later on.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

I guess that would depend on whether you believe more in a punishing God rather than a merciful God (or vice-versa). The argument on the fast-breaking seems to have taken us to a merciful-only God; are there theologians who agree with that position?

But let’s not confuse scruples with a good examination of conscience. We are sinners but we’ve become quite expert on rationalization, it seems. And of what value is Christianity to us if we fall into disbelief of sin altogether?

I don’t want to pursue this matter further here but going back to that post, it was the way it was worded that struck me.

.

Then we could say that you believe in a “punishing only” God?

Of what value is christianity?

 

[ProVobis]

Then we could say that you believe in a “punishing only” God?

I did not say that.

Of what value is christianity?

If you don’t believe in sin, than what did Christ die for? I see rationalization in many of your points but I’ve been guilty of that myself lately so I’ll try not to throw too many stones.

Personally I never thought a hour fast up till the time of communion, the exact time which was not known in most cases, was very workable. And this thread has indeed convinced me it wasn’t but not for the reasons I had originally thought.

 

[JimG]

It seems to me that just following the discipline is very freeing. One does not have to agonize about whether I should or should not receive. Oops, I forgot and had a snack, breaking the fast. I’ll just stay in the pew today. It’s not a big decision. I know the rule. If I haven’t kept the fast, I don’t receive communion. I don’t have to worry about mercy vs justice, legalism or laxity. I don’t have to worry about mortal vs venial sin. I don’t have to worry about whether my reasons are good or bad. I just follow the rule. It’s not a sin to not receive communion at any particular Mass. It’s not a sin to have a meal five minutes before Mass. All I have to do is stay in the pew if I haven’t kept the fast. Why make it so difficult?

 

[Bookcat]

It seems to me that just following the discipline is very freeing. One does not have to agonize about whether I should or should not receive. Oops, I forgot and had a snack, breaking the fast. I’ll just stay in the pew today. It’s not a big decision. I know the rule. If I haven’t kept the fast, I don’t receive communion.

I had a dream last night or earlier - that I ate lettuce (sitting in the pew) - lettuce! And then I realized I had broken the fast…and stayed put. (as I should).

Funny I must say…

 

[frangiuliano115]

I did not say that.

If you don’t believe in sin, than what did Christ die for? I see rationalization in many of your points but I’ve been guilty of that myself lately so I’ll try not to throw too many stones.

Personally I never thought a hour fast up till the time of communion, the exact time which was not known in most cases, was very workable. And this thread has indeed convinced me it wasn’t but not for the reasons I had originally thought.

ProVobis,

Those that understand my position, understand it. Those that don’t, don’t.

I could get into a more theological discussion here but what would be the point? Everyone is going to believe what they believe.

And you know the beauty of chiristianity? Each one of us will be judged by the light we’ve received. Yes, you’re right - God is just and He is also merciful.

Before I go, just let me make this very clear. Very clear. You’re asking ME if I don’t believe in sin, what did Christ die for? You may have read a certain posters comments to me that question my every motive, intent and knowledge. Let me say simply that I most definitely know what sin is. Do you know what the word sin actually means? It’s interesting. It means missing mark. Much as has happened to me on this thread, my missing the mark of explaining, or others missing the mark of understanding.

Your last pp shows me my words have been useless. They have not been about fasting before communion but about a much more important concept which I’ve been unable to get across. And for that I’m sorry.

In Christ
Fran

 

[ProVobis]

They have not been about fasting before communion but about a much more important concept which I’ve been unable to get across.

Okay, then may I suggest you start another thread on your concept? I’ve been called out too many times on not staying on topic.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Okay, then may I suggest you start another thread on your concept? I’ve been called out too many times on not staying on topic.

Tried PM’ing you but no luck.

Hate to just leave like this. I don’t start threads.

It’s not MY concept. It’s a valid christian concept.

Look at your name. It must come from:

This Is My Body Which Has Been Given Up For You

WHY do you think He gave up His body for you?
So you could worry if you had something to eat before supping with Him?

See, ProVobis. This doesn’t mean I think you should break the pre communion fast.

It’s complicated. But it’s simple.

You’re a good guy. Be seeing you around!

Fran

 

[guanophore]

Okay.  Why it's not a mortal sin:

These are the O.P.'s exact words:

just if I accidentally and without thinking picked up and ate a grape or something…

So what is mortal sin?
CCC no. 1855: “Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man **by a grave violation **of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to Him.”

CCC no. 1858: "For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: “Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate conssent.”

I leave it to you: Was the OP committing a mortal sin by accidentally and without thinking picking up a grape and eating it and the going to receive communion?

Was it a grave matter?
Were the three conditions required to make it a mortal sin present?

Perhaps you have not been able to read all the posts in the thread. There has been a lot of good expertise explaining to you why eating a grape, or anything else, is not a sin, whether it was done “accidently” or not.

You also seem to have disregard for this particular discipline of the Church.

No one here is trying to create their own church. I just think we could get a bit carried away at times. I’m just saying that we should get away from legalism and try out God’s grace. It works so much better. Try studying the Mosaic Covenant and then study the New Covenant.

You have created a false dichotomy, Fran. There is no contradiction between rules/disciplines and God’s grace.

No one here wants to twist church teachings. I know all about freedom:
You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.

So what is the truth? Jesus frees us from the FEAR of sin. That doesn’t mean we should sin. We also shouldn’t be walking around all day wondering if we’re sinning and worrying that we’ll sin, and terrified of hell. Jesus is there FOR us.

Love makes you follow all rules.  Remember Jesus two commandments?

Mathew 22:37
“Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind…And love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and prophets hang on these two commandments.”

So you see, I am following the rules, but not because I want to follow rules. Jesus said I Have Not Come To Abolish The Law, But To Fulfill It. So the Law is not abolished. But how do we keep the law? By loving God. By remembering His sacrifice for us. By trusting in Him and the sacrifice He made for us, by trustiing that he will not abandon us because we ate some grape some time before communion.

I am glad you can connect that it is possible to follow rules out of love for Jesus.

Then we could say that you believe in a “punishing only” God?

Of what value is christianity?

No, Fran. ProVobis is saying that a God who allows consequences is not contradictory to a merciful God.

It seems to me that just following the discipline is very freeing. One does not have to agonize about whether I should or should not receive. Oops, I forgot and had a snack, breaking the fast. I’ll just stay in the pew today. It’s not a big decision. I know the rule. If I haven’t kept the fast, I don’t receive communion. I don’t have to worry about mercy vs justice, legalism or laxity. I don’t have to worry about mortal vs venial sin. I don’t have to worry about whether my reasons are good or bad. I just follow the rule. It’s not a sin to not receive communion at any particular Mass. It’s not a sin to have a meal five minutes before Mass. All I have to do is stay in the pew if I haven’t kept the fast. Why make it so difficult?

Yes, following the rules is freeing. When we submit to Him in love, we are free indeed. I think the issue is really a difficulty with the authority of the Church. Fran has stated that she believes legalistic men have inserted themselves and their rules into Scripture and Church teaching.

You may have read a certain posters comments to me that question my every motive, intent and knowledge.

I believe you are very sincere in your faith. I don’t think your questions posted on this thread are seeking knowledge or information. I think they are a form of protest.

Your last pp shows me my words have been useless. They have not been about fasting before communion but about a much more important concept which I’ve been unable to get across. And for that I’m sorry.
In Christ
Fran

Your words would be much more convincing if you could support your fellow Catholics in their spirituality, even though it may differ from yours. You have asserted that those who follow rules that you describe as “silly” and “crazy” are legalistic and lack an appreciation for God’s mercy and grace. This attitude does not foster dialogue and understanding.

I think you truly have a fervent message/charism for God’s mercy and grace, something much too lacking in much of Catholicism. But the value of your message will not be reached if you cannot appreciate people who are different.

 

[guanophore]

It’s not MY concept. It’s a valid christian concept.

WHY do you think He gave up His body for you?
So you could worry if you had something to eat before supping with Him?

See, ProVobis. This doesn’t mean I think you should break the pre communion fast.

It’s complicated. But it’s simple.

Fran

Your fervent desire to help others see past legalism and focus on a relationship with Jesus. I think the problem is your delivery.