Should an Eastern Catholic infant receive Communion in a Roman Catholic church?

[Catherine_Grant]

Note from Moderator:

The focus of this forum is to provide a community for Eastern Catholics and to help Latin Catholics better appreciate the Church’s Eastern heritage. Non-Catholics are welcome to participate in compliance with the stated purpose of the forum.

We understand that there is a wide diversity of expression of theology, spirituality, and discipline between and within the Eastern, Oriental, and Western rites and churches. While these topics may legitimately be discussed in charity, calling into question the catholicity, orthodoxy, or personal faith of another is outside the purpose of this forum and will not be tolerated. Please review our forum guidelines on [charity (http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=132852) before posting.

Debate Guidelines for Eastern Catholicism
No direct or implied you statements unless it is genuine praise.

• You said…
• You need to…
• You don’t get it.
• Why don’t you…
• If only you…
• It is you who…
• You are wrong.
• You misunderstood.
• I’m not the one who…
• Some people here…

No indication of what the other needs to do unless it is genuine praise.

• You need to…
• Why don’t you…
• If you’d only…
• Those of us who have…

 

[ConstantineTG]

“What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? And if he finds it, truly I tell you, he is happier about that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off. In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should perish. Mt 18:12-14

An Eastern Catholic in an RC parish is not lost sheep. Well, from the greater perspective of Christianity. I’m pretty sure the EC bishops would want his sheep back though.

 

[CDB1718]

An Eastern Catholic in an RC parish is not lost sheep. Well, from the greater perspective of Christianity. I’m pretty sure the EC bishops would want his sheep back though.

Neither should he be abandoned, cast out into the wilderness with no sacramental life, to become a lost sheep. The Lord cares for every one of us as individuals. He doesn’t put the needs of one over the needs of another.

A person needs the sacraments. A priest might decide his congregation needs education in order to avoid scandal. He can handle both. He does not need to cast one aside in order to minister to the other.

 

[5Loaves]

Fasting is a basic precept of the Church, you can’t be Christian if you do not fast, along with receiving the Sacraments and prayer of course.

This is certainly incorrect teaching. There are many good and faithful Christians who do not fast because of reasons of health. Monk Moses, an occasional poster here, mentions in his interview on “Fasting in the Byzantine Church Year” on Youtube that he in unable to keep the fasts of his Church for reasons of health.

There are good and faithful Christians all over the world and throughout time who do not receive the Sacraments. One of my personal favorites is our mother among the saints Mary of Egypt. We hear her entire story during Great Lent in Matins of Great Canon. She received Holy Eucharist only once. There’s no mention of other Sacraments although much of her story is about her sinful life as she recounted it to St. Zosimas, which I think would be considered a Confession.

Fr. Taft in the last Orientale Lumen Conference speaks at length about the mother of a confrere who lived alone as a Christian during her life in India. Fr Taft said he was moved to tears by the son’s eulogy for his mother, and indeed Fr Taft seems to be chocking back tears as he recants the story. She clearly was not receiving the Holy Mysteries during her many years alone there, but is used by Fr Taft as an example of a great Christian life.

 

[mardukm]

When I was first trained as an EMHC I was specifically instructed to be aware that very young children from Eastern Catholic Churches or from Orthodox Churches could be brought to receive communion and that we had to look in the ciborium for a fraction of the host that was small enough to be safe for comsumption.

Wow! That’s awesome!

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

But the priest is, therefore he can only give Communion as per his own canons, not the communicants.

True, but let’s see what his canons assert:

**Can. 213 **The Christian faithful have the right to receive assistance from the sacred pastors out of the spiritual goods of the Church, especially the word of God and the sacraments.

Can. 214 The Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescripts of their own rite approved by the legitimate pastors of the Church and to follow their own form of spiritual life so long as it is consonant with the doctrine of the Church.

Can. 914 It is primarily the duty of parents and those who take the place of parents, as well as the duty of pastors, to take care that children who have reached the use of reason are prepared properly and, after they have made sacramental confession, are refreshed with this divine food as soon as possible. It is for the pastor to exercise vigilance so that children who have not attained the use of reason OR whom he judges are not sufficiently disposed do not approach holy communion.

So “age of reason” is not the only criteria that the Latin priest can use to judge whether a child can receive the Eucharist. Plus, we non-Latin Catholics, as Christian Faithful, have a right to receive from the Latin Rite priest according to the prescripts of our own Rite. That’s what the Canon Law of the Latin priest states.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[ConstantineTG]

This is certainly incorrect teaching. There are many good and faithful Christians who do not fast because of reasons of health. Monk Moses, an occasional poster here, mentions in his interview on “Fasting in the Byzantine Church Year” on Youtube that he in unable to keep the fasts of his Church for reasons of health.

There are good and faithful Christians all over the world and throughout time who do not receive the Sacraments. One of my personal favorites is our mother among the saints Mary of Egypt. We hear her entire story during Great Lent in Matins of Great Canon. She received Holy Eucharist only once. There’s no mention of other Sacraments although much of her story is about her sinful life as she recounted it to St. Zosimas, which I think would be considered a Confession.

Fr. Taft in the last Orientale Lumen Conference speaks at length about the mother of a confrere who lived alone as a Christian during her life in India. Fr Taft said he was moved to tears by the son’s eulogy for his mother, and indeed Fr Taft seems to be chocking back tears as he recants the story. She clearly was not receiving the Holy Mysteries during her many years alone there, but is used by Fr Taft as an example of a great Christian life.

That is of course exceptional cases. I mean, I can’t mention all exceptional cases everytime I post, it will turn a short 3-5 sentence post into a term paper if I cover all these bases. Situations like that goes without saying. Of course those who can fast and don’t have empty spiritual lives.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Can. 914 It is primarily the duty of parents and those who take the place of parents, as well as the duty of pastors, to take care that children who have reached the use of reason are prepared properly and, after they have made sacramental confession, are refreshed with this divine food as soon as possible. It is for the pastor to exercise vigilance so that children who have not attained the use of reason OR whom he judges are not sufficiently disposed do not approach holy communion.

So “age of reason” is not the only criteria that the Latin priest can use to judge whether a child can receive the Eucharist. Plus, we non-Latin Catholics, as Christian Faithful, have a right to receive from the Latin Rite priest according to the prescripts of our own Rite. That’s what the Canon Law of the Latin priest states.

Blessings,
Marduk

I disagree. Since the OR is used in the same sentence, it means the context is to be taken with the first staement, which is the age of reason. It means a pastor can deny Communion to someone above the age of reason but he feels is still not sufficiently disposed. That is why we have those stories of pastors denying 12 year old autistic children Communion. Because there is another canon (which I won’t dig up) that states that a child must be able to distinguish the Eucharist from ordinary food. Can’t say that to my kid who always says “yummy!” after Communion. Then again, that is why we say, “taste and see the goodness of the Lord!”

 

[ConstantineTG]

Neither should he be abandoned, cast out into the wilderness with no sacramental life, to become a lost sheep. The Lord cares for every one of us as individuals. He doesn’t put the needs of one over the needs of another.

A person needs the sacraments. A priest might decide his congregation needs education in order to avoid scandal. He can handle both. He does not need to cast one aside in order to minister to the other.

Traditionalist Latins would argue that you don’t need to receive Communion more than once per year. I don’t agree with that, but that is indeed the minimum prescribed by the Church.

I don’t receive when I go to the Orthodox.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Also, getting what we ECs have in our tradition from RC parishes, best way to bleed out all your congregation into RC parishes that have way more Masses every Sunday and is much closer to drive to for most of your congregation.

 

[CDB1718]

I disagree. Since the OR is used in the same sentence, it means the context is to be taken with the first staement, which is the age of reason. It means a pastor can deny Communion to someone above the age of reason but he feels is still not sufficiently disposed. That is why we have those stories of pastors denying 12 year old autistic children Communion. Because there is another canon (which I won’t dig up) that states that a child must be able to distinguish the Eucharist from ordinary food. Can’t say that to my kid who always says “yummy!” after Communion. Then again, that is why we say, “taste and see the goodness of the Lord!”

A pastor decides according to his own church’s rules and rubrics if a person is properly disposed. That canon discusses the priest’s role as pastor which includes proper formation. An Eastern Catholic child’s pastor has the same obligation to properly discern and prepare his parishioners. He uses his church’s rules and rubrics to do that. If the Eastern Catholic has no pastor, the Roman Catholic bishop is obligated to provide not just a priest, but a pastor who will allow them to maintain their Eastern Christian spiritual and liturgical life. “The Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescripts of their own rite approved by the legitimate pastors of the Church and to follow their own form of spiritual life so long as it is consonant with the doctrine of the Church.” Can. 214. If he [a diocesan bishop] has faithful of a different rite in his diocese, he is to provide for their spiritual needs either through priests or parishes of the same rite or through an episcopal vicar. Can. 383 §2.

No matter what the situation, the Eastern Catholic’s pastor is held to the Eastern rubrics in forming and discerning the child’s preparedness. When that Eastern Catholic goes to a parish in another jurisdiction, he is a traveler and different rules apply. The priest presiding is not functioning as his pastor.

That’s why there are conversations about denying the Eucharist to Catholics who are in public sin, like some politicians. Only their pastors are allowed to make the decision to excommunicate them. What priests and bishops of other territories may do is very limited.

The Eastern Catholic pastor and/or bishop decides according to his own rules and rubrics if his parishioners may receive. Where they go dictates how they receive.

While the Latin canons require that Roman Catholics be able to discern the Eucharist from ordinary bread, the Eastern canons have no equivalent requirement. The Eucharist may not be denied to the fully initiated Eastern Catholic on the basis of age, maturity, or understanding (cf. Can. 912, 923).

And his canons say “Any baptized person not prohibited by law can and must be admitted to holy communion.” Can. 912 and “Sacred ministers cannot deny the sacraments to those who seek them at appropriate times, are properly disposed, and are not prohibited by law from receiving them.” Can. 843 §1.

What makes an Eastern Catholic properly disposed to receive?
CCEO, Can. 697 Sacramental initiation in the mystery of salvation is perfected in the reception of the Divine Eucharist, and thus the Divine Eucharist is administered after baptism and chrismation with holy myron as soon as possible according to the norms of the particular law…
CCEO, Can. 712 Those who are publicly unworthy are forbidden from receiving the Divine Eucharist.
CCEO, Can. 713 §2 Concerning the preparation for participation in the Divine Eucharist through fast, prayers and other works, the Christian faithful are to observe faithfully the norms of the Church sui iuris in which they are enrolled, not only within the territorial boundaries of the same Church, but, inasmuch as it is possible, everywhere.
CCEO, Can. 719 Anyone who is aware of serious sin is to receive the sacrament of penance as soon as possible; it is strongly recommended to all the Christian faithful that they receive this sacrament frequently especially during the times of fasts and penance observed in their own Church sui iuris.
CCEO, Can. 1431 Those punished with a minor excommunication are deprived of the reception of the Divine Eucharist.

Unless you can show me an infant who is excommunicated or in a state of public sin, the Roman Catholic priest’s canons require him to commune a chrismated and communing Eastern Catholic child.

 

[babochka]

Do you know how vague “properly disposed” is? A priest can easily say, “only 7 and up are properly disposed to receive in our Rite.” That is the end of the discussion right there. Like I said, when in Rome…

Generally speaking, whether a person is properly disposed to receive Communion is a matter of individual conscience and not up to a priest to decide. Even in the case of public scandal (such as with pro-abortion politicians) there are procedures to be followed, in order to dialog with and educate the person, before denying Communion.

Besides, you are speaking now of individual cases in which a priest might object, but you have stated that you are opposed to children receiving in Latin Rite parishes because “when in Rome…” But what if the priest does not object, as is the experience of the majority of Eastern Catholics who have responded to this thread. What is the problem with them receiving under those circumstances?

 

[mardukm]

I disagree. Since the OR is used in the same sentence, it means the context is to be taken with the first staement, which is the age of reason. It means a pastor can deny Communion to someone above the age of reason but he feels is still not sufficiently disposed.

Your rationale only works if the conjunction is “AND,” indicating he must use the age of reason along with the condition of being properly disposed. The conjunctive OR indicates an option, not an additional condition. Using grammatical context is fine, but only if used correctly.

Regardless, you have not addressed the other canons I mentioned, which refutes your claim that the Latin priest cannot administer the Sacrament according to the needs of my child as a non-Latin.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[CDB1718]

Also, getting what we ECs have in our tradition from RC parishes, best way to bleed out all your congregation into RC parishes that have way more Masses every Sunday and is much closer to drive to for most of your congregation.

You can’t get any of our tradition in a Roman Catholic Church. You may receive the Eucharist. You have to do it according to their tradition. That means you sit, stand, and kneel when they do. You say the Mass responses. You sing the hymns. You kneel at the altar rail. You receive a consecrated unleavened wafer, not a leavened prosphoron. We share full communion so you are welcome to the sacrament, and all the liturgy and tradition for that sacrament is done according to their tradition.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Your rationale only works if the preposition is “AND,” indicating he must use the age of reason along with the condition of being properly disposed. The conjunctive OR indicates an option, not an additional condition. Using grammatical context is fine, but only if used correctly.

Regardless, you have not addressed the other canons I mentioned, which refutes your claim that the Latin priest cannot administer the Sacrament according to the needs of my child as a non-Latin.

Blessings,
Marduk

Of course not. If it is a separate thought then it should be a separate sentence. Since this is an official document of the Church, I would trust it has been proofread well prior to publishing.

 

[ConstantineTG]

A pastor decides according to his own church’s rules and rubrics if a person is properly disposed. That canon discusses the priest’s role as pastor which includes proper formation. An Eastern Catholic child’s pastor has the same obligation to properly discern and prepare his parishioners. He uses his church’s rules and rubrics to do that. If the Eastern Catholic has no pastor, the Roman Catholic bishop is obligated to provide not just a priest, but a pastor who will allow them to maintain their Eastern Christian spiritual and liturgical life. “The Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescripts of their own rite approved by the legitimate pastors of the Church and to follow their own form of spiritual life so long as it is consonant with the doctrine of the Church.” Can. 214. If he [a diocesan bishop] has faithful of a different rite in his diocese, he is to provide for their spiritual needs either through priests or parishes of the same rite or through an episcopal vicar. Can. 383 §2.

No matter what the situation, the Eastern Catholic’s pastor is held to the Eastern rubrics in forming and discerning the child’s preparedness. When that Eastern Catholic goes to a parish in another jurisdiction, he is a traveler and different rules apply. The priest presiding is not functioning as his pastor.

That’s why there are conversations about denying the Eucharist to Catholics who are in public sin, like some politicians. Only their pastors are allowed to make the decision to excommunicate them. What priests and bishops of other territories may do is very limited.

The Eastern Catholic pastor and/or bishop decides according to his own rules and rubrics if his parishioners may receive. Where they go dictates how they receive.

While the Latin canons require that Roman Catholics be able to discern the Eucharist from ordinary bread, the Eastern canons have no equivalent requirement. The Eucharist may not be denied to the fully initiated Eastern Catholic on the basis of age, maturity, or understanding (cf. Can. 912, 923).

I agree with what you said. But the RC priest does not know the mind of the EC priest, thus he will need to judge if the child is properly disposed according to his own tradition. Unless the EC priest calls beforehand.

 

[mardukm]

Of course not. If it is a separate thought then it should be a separate sentence. Since this is an official document of the Church, I would trust it has been proofread well prior to publishing.

Not sure how that addressed my comments. Please explain.

 

[mardukm]

I agree with what you said. But the RC priest does not know the mind of the EC priest, thus he will need to judge if the child is properly disposed according to his own tradition. Unless the EC priest calls beforehand.

He doesn’t need to contact the EC priest. That’s the parent’s responsibility to inform the priest.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[ConstantineTG]

He doesn’t need to contact the EC priest. That’s the parent’s responsibility to inform the priest.

Blessings,
Marduk

Have you dont this in real life?

Would it be a sin for me to attempt this in real life for the sake of satisfying curiousity?

 

[CDB1718]

I agree with what you said. But the RC priest does not know the mind of the EC priest, thus he will need to judge if the child is properly disposed according to his own tradition. Unless the EC priest calls beforehand.

There probably is room for better awareness of the Eastern requirements among Roman Catholic priests. Most people express just resolutions, so it doesn’t seem to be a big problem. An infant who has been chrismated would have to be excommunicated or in a state of public sin to not be properly disposed. There’s not much guess work involved that a chrismated infant is properly disposed,

If a priest really believes the child isn’t chrismated then there’s some discussion and discernment that needs to take place. I’ve never heard of a person facing that issue and it would not be unique to Eastern Catholics but would cover any Catholic travelers. Many Eastern Catholics carry an introduction with them and contact the priest before traveling because that level of scrutiny is more common in Eastern Christian communities. Those aren’t requirements but are prudent and kind.