Starving to receive Jesus body and blood

  • Thread starter Thread starter FMLJoliecouer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
i will pray for you too!

in addition, i offer two verses from St Paul:

Rom 8:28
We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose.

Phil 4:13
I can do all things through him who strengthens me.

He strengthens you in many other ways… tho physical closeness is problematic out of charity for the community (i.e. avoiding scandal), His Holy Spirit is nonetheless residing in your soul, the temple of God, where His gifts are awaiting your perusal. i would also encourage you to throw yourself into serving His people, for Matthew 25:40 says: “Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family,* you did it to me.”

communion with Jesus, while most tangible in receiving the Real Presence, is not exclusive to that. your struggle in hungering for Him is very admirable and truly an inspiration! but do not let the desire be corrupted by the devil into a sentimental blaming of the Church… the Body of Christ also yearns for your return and given your earnestness, i am sure your priest(s) will be praying around the clock for circumstances to improve.

go for adoration regularly, and seek private communion if possible… these are wonderful suggestions our other forumites have presented.

your soul is safe! for you have obeyed the Lord’s call to come home… have faith and be patient - heaven awaits!
 
I’m sorry :hug1: that must be really hard. I wanted to receive the Eucharist so much too when I was becoming Catholic, but it took a while unti I actually could.

Try to offer this to God… don’t give up. This is a trial but you can still be sanctified through it. Try to trust Him.

And say the Spiritual Communion prayer 🙂 Our Lord appeared to a Saint (sorry can’t remember which one…) and showed her two vessels, one gold and one silver… and He said, the gold one contains all her Communions… but the silver one contains all her spiritual communions. It’s not the same thing but it still gives a lot of peace 👍

Try to go to Adoration when you can too, to be around the Blessed Sacrament…

God bless you.
 
Claire_from_DE said:
I think it would be relatively easy to get an annulment due to lack of form. But first you must be legally divorced.
Click to expand...
This part is really easy - I’ve been there. It’s not really an annulment, because no valid sacrament existed. It’s a ruling by the local Diocese of “Lack of Canonic Form” It’s a very short questionnaire; you’ll need a civil divorce, your sacramental records, and (if my memory serves) a copy of the marriage license. Its much faster than an annulment because it’s cut and dried; you are Catholic and there was no Priest. You entered into a civil contract that the divorce has dissolved.

Once you receive the “Lack of Canonic Form” finding, you are free to marry in the Church.

We are praying for you. This is your cross – we each have one (if we choose to carry it)
God bless you!
:knight2:
 
Hello FMLJoliecouer,
I want to relate my story to you real quick to let you know that you are not alone. When I was starting my reversion process to going back to being a practicing Roman Catholic, I had several obstacles to get over in order to receive Jesus in the most Holy Sacrament. During the time that I had met my current wife and we were in about the same spiritual boat. We were both Catholics, but were not practicing. I was interested in growing in my faith, but she was not. We started to live together and conceived a son before getting married. One day I went to confession and told my priest my situation and he informed me that he cannot absolve me of my sins and I cannot partake of the Eucharist or future confessions until I get this living situation taken care of. There I was living with a non-practicing Catholic woman who had two kids, one of our own on the way, previously married by law (both of us) and I was growing in desperate desire for my Eucharistic Lord. I prayed to God asking him for guidance on all these situations and to alleviate all these things that I had already set up that were keeping me from him. It seemed impossible at the time, but I was inspired to pick the most immediate problem (not being married in the church), take care of it, then take care of the next problem, baptizing my children ( I still have the two to go) and so on.
My suggestion to you FMLJoliecouer is to handle one problem at a time. Take into consideration all the things that need to be done and start knocking them off your list one at a time. I know the list is overwhelming, but BELIEVE ME, GOD WILL SEE YOU THROUGH IT! He wants you to receive His Son in Holy Communion and He will have your back in each and every issue on your list. Have faith, pray and DO NOT GIVE UP. Despair is of the devil, perseverance is of God! Take care sister!
 
It seems to me your situation is not as bad as you think. But, you need to procede carefully.

The first thing you need to discern is whether you should indeed persue an annulment. You do not need an annulment to become a Roman Catholic. There are lots of people in good standing with the Church who are separated, and even civily divorced, but still married in the eyes of the Church.

You need to think carefully about whether you really think that your marriage was invalid.

If you and the father of your youngest child are living as brother and sister, there is no problem with that. Given that you have a young child, it would not likely be a good idea for you to live separately. And if you would both like to continue with that arrangement, you don’t need an annulment in order to marry.

In any case, I cannot see any reason relating to this that you could not receive the Eucharist once you are finished with RCIA. It should only be a problem if you are living as a married couple - since you aren’t, there is no issue. You could still pursue the divorce and annulment in that state if you wanted to, or you could stay as you are.
 
Bluegoat said:
It seems to me your situation is not as bad as you think. But, you need to procede carefully.

The first thing you need to discern is whether you should indeed persue an annulment. You do not need an annulment to become a Roman Catholic. There are lots of people in good standing with the Church who are separated, and even civily divorced, but still married in the eyes of the Church.

You need to think carefully about whether you really think that your marriage was invalid.

If you and the father of your youngest child are living as brother and sister, there is no problem with that. Given that you have a young child, it would not likely be a good idea for you to live separately. And if you would both like to continue with that arrangement, you don’t need an annulment in order to marry.

In any case, I cannot see any reason relating to this that you could not receive the Eucharist once you are finished with RCIA. It should only be a problem if you are living as a married couple - since you aren’t, there is no issue. You could still pursue the divorce and annulment in that state if you wanted to, or you could stay as you are.
Click to expand...
As you are Anglican, I do not think, with all due espect, you quite understand how the Church sees things.

Actually, the OP does need to pursue the process. If what occurred in her first marriage is true, then she needs to get a decree of nullity since there is a good chance that the mariage could be declared invalid due to a defect of form. Then, she needs to get a civil divorce so that she could be free to marry, if she so chose, the man with whom she is living with right now. Either way, she should not stay as she is. This matter needs to be cleared up as soon as possible.
 
benedictgal said:
As you are Anglican, I do not think, with all due espect, you quite understand how the Church sees things.

Actually, the OP does need to pursue the process. If what occurred in her first marriage is true, then she needs to get a decree of nullity since there is a good chance that the mariage could be declared invalid due to a defect of form. Then, she needs to get a civil divorce so that she could be free to marry, if she so chose, the man with whom she is living with right now. Either way, she should not stay as she is. This matter needs to be cleared up as soon as possible.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that anyone who thinks there could be some reason that their marriage might be invalid needs to pursue an annulment? If that is the case, than many people who are happily married may well not be actually married at all.

It sounded to me like the OP was very unsure about whether there were really grounds for annulment in the first marriage - her instinct was that there was not, it was pressure from others that was prompting her to reconsider.
 
Bluegoat said:
Are you saying that anyone who thinks there could be some reason that their marriage might be invalid needs to pursue an annulment? If that is the case, than many people who are happily married may well not be actually married at all.

It sounded to me like the OP was very unsure about whether there were really grounds for annulment in the first marriage - her instinct was that there was not, it was pressure from others that was prompting her to reconsider.
Click to expand...
What I am saying is this: rather than second-guess and try to see if one can receive Holy Communion on one’s own authority, it is better to consult with the proper Church authorities, in this case, her pastor and the diocesan tribunal. If I were the OP, I would rather secure the declaration of nullity and get a civil divorce so that I could be really free. I would also settle the matter of my current situation as well, again, with the guidance of the Church.
 
benedictgal said:
What I am saying is this: rather than second-guess and try to see if one can receive Holy Communion on one’s own authority, it is better to consult with the proper Church authorities, in this case, her pastor and the diocesan tribunal. If I were the OP, I would rather secure the declaration of nullity and get a civil divorce so that I could be really free. I would also settle the matter of my current situation as well, again, with the guidance of the Church.
Click to expand...
But this doesn’t really address her main concern, which was not being able to receive while she was waiting for the annulment and to regularize her current relationship. I have never heard of someone being told they could not receive due to a previous marriage if they were now being celibate with regard to any other relationship. Nor are the barred if indeed they have no grounds for an annulment.

She also cannot make an application to the tribunal unless she is fairly confident about the personal side of the circumstances around her marriage. A tribunal can only rule on the evidence given to them. If it is a matter of something really objective, like someone who was not who they claimed, it would be easy. But if it is a matter of someone saying that they were not competent to make a vow of marriage, or didn’t understand what it meant, or that their intentions weren’t clear, than their decision being correct is going to depend on what the person says being the truth. It would be very inappropriate, and immoral, for someone to go forward with seeking an annulment on such grounds until they had really considered the matter carefully, prayed over it, and received good counseling. It can be difficult for anyone to judge their own intentions in that way, especially since no one is ever perfect in their intentions or understanding. So if the OP is still not sure, it would be better to wait until she has more discernment before she makes a decision. And although it is a good idea to seek out help in doing so, that does not mean bowing to pressure from people who think it is a requirement that she have an annulment.

I have no idea what really being free means. If you are married, you are no longer free.
 
Bluegoat said:
But this doesn’t really address her main concern, which was not being able to receive while she was waiting for the annulment and to regularize her current relationship. I have never heard of someone being told they could not receive due to a previous marriage if they were now being celibate with regard to any other relationship. Nor are the barred if indeed they have no grounds for an annulment.

She also cannot make an application to the tribunal unless she is fairly confident about the personal side of the circumstances around her marriage. A tribunal can only rule on the evidence given to them. If it is a matter of something really objective, like someone who was not who they claimed, it would be easy. But if it is a matter of someone saying that they were not competent to make a vow of marriage, or didn’t understand what it meant, or that their intentions weren’t clear, than their decision being correct is going to depend on what the person says being the truth. It would be very inappropriate, and immoral, for someone to go forward with seeking an annulment on such grounds until they had really considered the matter carefully, prayed over it, and received good counseling. It can be difficult for anyone to judge their own intentions in that way, especially since no one is ever perfect in their intentions or understanding. So if the OP is still not sure, it would be better to wait until she has more discernment before she makes a decision. And although it is a good idea to seek out help in doing so, that does not mean bowing to pressure from people who think it is a requirement that she have an annulment.

I have no idea what really being free means. If you are married, you are no longer free.
Click to expand...
No, it would not. Again, you are coming from the Anglican perspective, which does not necessarily jibe with the way the Church sees things.

The answer is that until she resolves her situation, with the guidance of the Church (including her pastor and the tribunal), she cannot present herself for Holy Communion at this time. Because she is not sure, she needs to work with the Church to solve the matter. Inasmuch as her first marriage had a defect in the form, she still needs to get that declaration (along with getting the divorce).
 
benedictgal said:
No, it would not. Again, you are coming from the Anglican perspective, which does not necessarily jibe with the way the Church sees things.

The answer is that until she resolves her situation, with the guidance of the Church (including her pastor and the tribunal), she cannot present herself for Holy Communion at this time. Because she is not sure, she needs to work with the Church to solve the matter. Inasmuch as her first marriage had a defect in the form, she still needs to get that declaration (along with getting the divorce).
Click to expand...
If I was coming at it from an Anglican perspective, then I would have said something quite different. But you don’t seem to understand that a divorce is not an impediment to receiving the Eucharist according to the Catholic Church, as long as it has been confessed. There is no need to seek an annulment.

Perhaps you might find these threads from the apologists section useful.
Can a divorced person without a Church annulment participate in the sacraments
How can a non-Catholic divorcee get baptised without an annulment?
URL="http://http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=215305&
 
Bluegoat said:
If I was coming at it from an Anglican perspective, then I would have said something quite different. But you don’t seem to understand that a divorce is not an impediment to receiving the Eucharist according to the Catholic Church, as long as it has been confessed. There is no need to seek an annulment.

Perhaps you might find these threads from the apologists section useful.
Can a divorced person without a Church annulment participate in the sacraments
How can a non-Catholic divorcee get baptised without an annulment?
[

Yes, I know that. But, this is an entirely different situation that the OP is facing, something I do not think you understand.

The problem is that she has not even gotten a divorce yet from her first husband. Second, she needs to see her priest and the tribunal so that she can get her decree of nullity. Third, the man she is living with is not her husband. Inasmuch as they may be living as brother and sister, she still needs to get guidance from the Church as to rectifying all of the situations. She just can’t go on her own and receive, especially since this scenario is rather complicated.]("http://http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=215305&[/QUOTE)
Click to expand...
 
benedictgal said:
Yes, I know that. But, this is an entirely different situation that the OP is facing, something I do not think you understand.

The problem is that she has not even gotten a divorce yet from her first husband. Second, she needs to see her priest and the tribunal so that she can get her decree of nullity. Third, the man she is living with is not her husband. Inasmuch as they may be living as brother and sister, she still needs to get guidance from the Church as to rectifying all of the situations. She just can’t go on her own and receive, especially since this scenario is rather complicated.
Click to expand...
No one said she should go on her own without permission of her priest. But if someone told her that she can’t receive until she has an annulment, which seems to be her impression, then she is being misled.Sometimes even priests do give inaccurate information about such things.

The divorce is even more immaterial than the annulment. She doesn’t need an annulment unless she wants to remarry, nor does she need a divorce unless she wants an annulment, which is simply a civil ruling. It is also usual in situations where there is a subsequent attachment with children to allow the couple to go on living as brother and sister, either until an annulment is granted, or even permanently if the application is rejected or not sought.

All of these are Catholic norms, and have nothing to do with Anglicanism which has a different approach entirely.
 
Bluegoat said:
No one said she should go on her own without permission of her priest. But if someone told her that she can’t receive until she has an annulment, which seems to be her impression, then she is being misled.Sometimes even priests do give inaccurate information about such things.

The divorce is even more immaterial than the annulment. She doesn’t need an annulment unless she wants to remarry, nor does she need a divorce unless she wants an annulment, which is simply a civil ruling. It is also usual in situations where there is a subsequent attachment with children to allow the couple to go on living as brother and sister, either until an annulment is granted, or even permanently if the application is rejected or not sought.

All of these are Catholic norms, and have nothing to do with Anglicanism which has a different approach entirely.
Click to expand...
Nonetheless, she needs to consult with the Church regarding the course of action she needs to take. As it is, she is still married and she is living with is not her husband. These are things that she needs to take care of and settle before she can receive Holy Communion.

What you sent does not quite address these issues. As I indicated earlier, were I the OP, I would consult with the Church before taking it upon myself to do something that I probably, in all likelihood, should not be doing.
 
To the OP:

The best rule of thumb when in doubt is: Ask the Church. Tell the Church. Consult the Church. Listen to the Church.

If a Catholic tells you that you don’t need to listen to the Church or ask the Church and to go ahead and decide for yourself and to go ahead and receive Holy Communion without seeking the wisdom (and if necessary the ruling) of Holy Mother Church, my advice is to nod your head, say thank you, and then run, don’t walk, to your nearest Priest or Bishop. We should always seek the counsel of our Mother and then we should do the best we can to follow that counsel. Then if a Shepherd tells you something that is in error, at least you will have obeyed and that will count in your favor, as our Lord told St. Faustina on so many occasions. The Shepherd will have to answer for his own actions, but you have to answer for your own. Play it safe. Find out the truth and act accordingly.
 
The OP isn’t clear in her post why it is she thinks she will not be able to receive the Eucharist until she has got her annulment and perhaps even remarried. It isn’t clear that her priest actually told her that. Because it seems so out of line with the direction people are usually given and what the Church actually says about such circumstances, I think it is worthwhile to suggest that she look into it more. It may be there could have been a mistake or mis-communication somewhere.

Some possibilities are that she incorrectly inferred it from something else he said, that she misunderstood, that someone else such as an instructor told her and it isn’t true at all, or that he is being unclear about exactly what the impediment is and it is something that hasn’t been mentioned.

If any of these may be the case, she needs to have it clarified. And if she is really having trouble communicating with him, perhaps go to someone else, with the priest’s blessing, to discuss it. Sometimes people just don’t click as far as explanations go.

I also think, if he is saying what she thinks, that she needs to get a careful explanation of why he thinks that is the case. And if she finds it quite unsatisfactory, she is not being unreasonable to ask for a second opinion - though that would have to be handled sensitively. Denying someone the Eucharist is serious.

As for her annulment, if she is having difficulty, it is also very reasonable for her to tell him she needs time to think about it, or perhaps speak to a spiritual adviser. It also sounds as if it is unclear to her just why he wants her to pursue the annulment if she does not want to marry again, and that she feels he may be asking her to say something which is untrue. Both of those situations ought to be corrected. If he does want her to say something that she doesn’t think is true (not very likely I suspect) then she should certainly not do it.

I find it odd though, that people regularly write to their bishops about priests walking around the sanctuary during a homily, wearing the wrong vestments, or smoking cigarettes, but in the case of what could be a more serious departure from accepted practice, the OP is told she should just live with the decision of the priest without going any farther.
 
Though some priests may still ask you to wait until you have received the full catechism and the living situation is rectified to avoid public scandal, if you were indeed baptized Catholic, then you are Catholic. And if you agree to live as brother and sister with the man you now have a son with (i.e. not have sexual relations with him till the marriage situation is rectified) and go to Confession, you should be able to receive the sacraments.

On a more personal note, I am a convert and came into the Church in 2005. I remember very well the waiting and longing. It is difficult to endure, but so worth it. You will be in my prayers.
 
Bluegoat said:
The OP isn’t clear in her post why it is she thinks she will not be able to receive the Eucharist until she has got her annulment and perhaps even remarried. It isn’t clear that her priest actually told her that. Because it seems so out of line with the direction people are usually given and what the Church actually says about such circumstances, I think it is worthwhile to suggest that she look into it more. It may be there could have been a mistake or mis-communication somewhere.

Some possibilities are that she incorrectly inferred it from something else he said, that she misunderstood, that someone else such as an instructor told her and it isn’t true at all, or that he is being unclear about exactly what the impediment is and it is something that hasn’t been mentioned.

If any of these may be the case, she needs to have it clarified. And if she is really having trouble communicating with him, perhaps go to someone else, with the priest’s blessing, to discuss it. Sometimes people just don’t click as far as explanations go.

I also think, if he is saying what she thinks, that she needs to get a careful explanation of why he thinks that is the case. And if she finds it quite unsatisfactory, she is not being unreasonable to ask for a second opinion - though that would have to be handled sensitively. Denying someone the Eucharist is serious.

As for her annulment, if she is having difficulty, it is also very reasonable for her to tell him she needs time to think about it, or perhaps speak to a spiritual adviser. It also sounds as if it is unclear to her just why he wants her to pursue the annulment if she does not want to marry again, and that she feels he may be asking her to say something which is untrue. Both of those situations ought to be corrected. If he does want her to say something that she doesn’t think is true (not very likely I suspect) then she should certainly not do it.

I find it odd though, that people regularly write to their bishops about priests walking around the sanctuary during a homily, wearing the wrong vestments, or smoking cigarettes, but in the case of what could be a more serious departure from accepted practice, the OP is told she should just live with the decision of the priest without going any farther.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, I do not think you carefully read my posts. I advised the OP to go to her priest and to the Diocesan Tribunal. From what I recall, you discouraged the suggestion of going to the Diocesan Tribunal and posted some threads.

The situation that the OP describes is different from what is contained in the threads. First of all, she needs to straighten the matter of her marriage. She has not even gotten a divorce yet. She also needs to petition for a declaration of nullity, as well as to secure a civil divorce. She also needs to straighten out her current situation, as she is living with a man who is not her husband and with whom she has had a child. This is something that must be handled and guided by the Church, and, the appropriate place would be first with her pastor and then with the Diocesan Tribunal.
 
benedictgal said:
With all due respect, I do not think you carefully read my posts. I advised the OP to go to her priest and to the Diocesan Tribunal. From what I recall, you discouraged the suggestion of going to the Diocesan Tribunal and posted some threads.

The situation that the OP describes is different from what is contained in the threads. First of all, she needs to straighten the matter of her marriage. She has not even gotten a divorce yet. She also needs to petition for a declaration of nullity, as well as to secure a civil divorce. She also needs to straighten out her current situation, as she is living with a man who is not her husband and with whom she has had a child. This is something that must be handled and guided by the Church, and, the appropriate place would be first with her pastor and then with the Diocesan Tribunal.
Click to expand...
The OPs situation is quite common, and similar to that found in many threads in the apologist section. People can’t or won’t get an annulment, but have a child with someone else, who they are not going to marry. The Church asks that they remain celibate but they remain together to parent the child - if they can’t do so, then they would have to live separately.

If you mean the OP should go to the tribunal to get advice, that is likely a good idea. If you mean she should go and present her case to be ruled upon, then she shouldn’t do that until she decides that she should pursue an annulment. I agree that she should speak to her pastor, or to someone else if they aren’t communicating well.

But her posts said several things which suggested that there might be misinformation - things which are not in line with what the Catholic Church teaches. Do you think it is bad for her to know that she may have misunderstood, or that someone might be giving her bad information?

Why is it you think she is required to get a divorce and annulment? Even for a defect of form, it isn’t required by the church unless she wants to marry again, which she doesn’t. This isn’t up to an individual priest to rule on.

She is not in a morally compromising position with the man she lives with. They are celibate, they are raising a child, they intend to remain celibate. Many couples do this with the blessing of the Church, because they have had an annulment denied or don’t wish to seek one, but they need to raise children. The only problem would be that people might get the wrong idea - though depending on how open they were about the situation, it could actually be inspiring for others. And marrying when both feel called to a celibate life could have problems as well, both technically and personally.
 
Bluegoat said:
The OPs situation is quite common, and similar to that found in many threads in the apologist section. People can’t or won’t get an annulment, but have a child with someone else, who they are not going to marry. The Church asks that they remain celibate but they remain together to parent the child - if they can’t do so, then they would have to live separately.

If you mean the OP should go to the tribunal to get advice, that is likely a good idea. If you mean she should go and present her case to be ruled upon, then she shouldn’t do that until she decides that she should pursue an annulment. I agree that she should speak to her pastor, or to someone else if they aren’t communicating well.

But her posts said several things which suggested that there might be misinformation - things which are not in line with what the Catholic Church teaches. Do you think it is bad for her to know that she may have misunderstood, or that someone might be giving her bad information?

Why is it you think she is required to get a divorce and annulment? Even for a defect of form, it isn’t required by the church unless she wants to marry again, which she doesn’t. This isn’t up to an individual priest to rule on.

She is not in a morally compromising position with the man she lives with. They are celibate, they are raising a child, they intend to remain celibate. Many couples do this with the blessing of the Church, because they have had an annulment denied or don’t wish to seek one, but they need to raise children. The only problem would be that people might get the wrong idea - though depending on how open they were about the situation, it could actually be inspiring for others. And marrying when both feel called to a celibate life could have problems as well, both technically and personally.
Click to expand...
But, she also noted that she was not quite sure what to do about her situation. Moving out is out of the question because of the child. However, in either case, she needs to get this matter straightened out. This is something for her particular diocese to handle. Furthermore, there may be more details that we are not privvy to know. Again, it is best to let the Church handle this.

Of course, I do know of one exception where marriage and celibacy collaborated rather well: the Blessed Virgin Mary and St. Joseph, her most chaste spouse. But, that was indeed a rare situation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top