Taking Eucharist 55min after eating

[Rara_Avis]

---

It is ---- if a person knows that we are to fast for 1 hr-- and intentionally does not fast. This falls into the belief that our Lord is not worthy enough for us to fast for that one hr. That 1 hr. is part of our preparation for receiving our Lord.

Exactly …

If you fall short of the hour (which I personally think is a ridiculouly short amount of time) you fall short … oh well I’m close enough - really gives the whole thing a wishy washy feeling … like it was not all that important anyway.

once again illness and all that aside

 

[Distressed]

If someone intends to fast for at least an hour and after receiving Holy Communion realizes they didn’t, they obviously did not sin.

However if someone is aware before they receive that it won’t be less than an hour, but they feel they are “close enough” or that the fast dosen’t matter than that’s wrong. They should not receive. They can make the effort not to receive.

 

[MusicMan]

Make an appointment to discuss this matter with your priest. Assume his opinion on the matter is correct, and follow the instructions he gives you.

Then share them with us.

 

[mommyof4]

Just a few months ago I heard an older priest saying on EWTN that the one hour is a recommendation, and we should try and stick to it, but should not get bogged down in scrupulosity.

I like that recommendation myself.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

It’s very important to remember that the poster mentioned illness. That changes the entire game.

Second, moral theology does recognize that 55 minutes is a lot different than 15 minutes.

Scrupulous people start worrying about “I fasted only 55.678 minutes…is it a mortal sin? Will I burn in hell for it?”

They have forgotten the “requirements” for something to be mortal, and they have fallen into the trap that missing a fast unintentionally by 5 minutes isn’t mortally sinful.

The thing we are missing here is that everyone is NOT required to receive Holy Communion every time they attend Mass. If one fails to meet the Eucharistic fast and is not specifically under a doctors care regarding eating and say blood sugar etc. One should NOT receive and simply plan better the next week. That is not the same as someone who may not have the opportunity to receive Holy Communion for a long time if they do not receive now. The rule is not made to be bent, but followed!

 

[Walking_Home]

Originally Posted by Eireann
Just a few months ago I heard an older priest saying on EWTN that the one hour is a recommendation, and we should try and stick to it, but should not get bogged down in scrupulosity

I like that recommendation myself.

---

It is not a “recommendation”—when it is canon law.
The 1 hr. fast—is the least—we are called to do.

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM

Can. 919 §1. A person who is to receive the Most Holy Eucharist is to abstain for at least one hour before holy communion from any food and drink, except for only water and medicine.

 

[Eireann]

I like that recommendation myself.

I’m not sure of the two priests in question, one is older with glasses, the other has a beard and also wears glasses.

They mostly answer email questions, anyway I personally stick to the one hour fast, even though my tummy was talking to me this morning at Mass.

I would never advise anyone to break this fast, it isn’t so hard to keep, and a lot easier than years ago when you had to fast from midnight previous until Mass the next day.

Actually looking at this thread I think some of the pharisees suffered from scrupulosity, plucking an ear of wheat on the Sabbath etc;

But we should stick to the Church rules, and should know them, but I don’t think we’ll go-to hell for taking Communion 5 minutes short of one hour, nuff said.

 

[chicago]

Three hours now there’s a resonable fast. I have to think about what time to prepare a meal - what time to start eating in order to finish on time - and then the whole time I am preparing myself to recieve my Lord …if you think about it even 3 hrs is not much of a sacrifice compared to what you are getting in return.

While I absolutely agree that a three hour fast is a much better precedant, I can also see how this too could cause all kinds trouble. People who wake up and feel that they need something to get them started and alert but also have to go to a morning Mass would become frustrated. People would perhaps fret all the more about, “Oh my goodness, I can’t (or didn’t) fast more than 2 and a half hours, what’ll I do!” So it’s a can of worms any way we slice it and maybe there is no easy reasolution. I dunno, split the difference and make it 2 hours, maybe?

 

[chicago]

The rule is not made to be bent, but followed!

I think that this really is a case of understanding the “Spirit of the Law”.

If someone grossly disgregards the fast and thinks nothing of it, “Oh well, so what, I’ll go to communion anyway”… well then that’s a problem. But if, really, what is going on is that they for whatever reason reasonably missed by, say 10 minutes, then while it is worthwhile considering abstaining from reception out of a sense of reverence, it is also sensibile to consider that the Lord might be more pleased by you receiving communion. Afterall, at most failing to fast is likely a veniel sin in the great majority of cases and this would be forgiven by sincere contrition. More likely, it is merley an honest failure for everything in this imperfect world to work out perfectly.

 

[LilyM]

I should think Our Lord would be more pleased by you showing proper respect for the Real Presence and abstaining than by knowingly receiving Him having not properly prepared to do so.

As for it ‘only’ being a venial sin at most - there’s no such thing as ‘only’ a venial sin, all sin is to be avoided, and I think it would be kind of wildly contrary to the point of receiving Communion if in doing so you incur even a venial sin.

 

[chicago]

As for it ‘only’ being a venial sin at most - there’s no such thing as ‘only’ a venial sin, all sin is to be avoided…

Well, no one is saying, “Go ahead and sin!” But if we are fretting over the seriousness of the matter, let’s remember that it may have been minor.

…and I think it would be kind of wildly contrary to the point of receiving Communion if in doing so you incur even a venial sin.

But is the sin (if sin was incurred at all) in receiving communion or in failing to fast? If it is the latter, then the reception of communion, itself, wipes away a veniel sin for which one is truly sorry.

 

[LilyM]

The sin is of course in receiving Communion improperly - you don’t need to fast at all if you’re not receiving, as you should know.

And you can’t presume automatic forgiveness even of venial sin upon reception of communion - it doesn’t work like a candy machine. To be forgiven you must be genuinely contrite for your sin.

And in all cases the aim, as I said, should be not to sin in the first place.

 

[Walking_Home]

I’m not sure of the two priests in question, one is older with glasses, the other has a beard and also wears glasses.

They mostly answer email questions, anyway I personally stick to the one hour fast, even though my tummy was talking to me this morning at Mass.

I would never advise anyone to break this fast, it isn’t so hard to keep, and a lot easier than years ago when you had to fast from midnight previous until Mass the next day.

Actually looking at this thread I think some of the pharisees suffered from scrupulosity, plucking an ear of wheat on the Sabbath etc;

But we should stick to the Church rules, and should know them, but I don’t think we’ll go-to hell for taking Communion 5 minutes short of one hour, nuff said.

---

So now we are pharisees-----for putting God first. Is it just to much to impose on ourselves and fast for that one hr. Are we becoming that selfish and self–centered.

 

[chicago]

The sin is of course in receiving Communion improperly - you don’t need to fast at all if you’re not receiving, as you should know.

True enough about “not needing to fast”, but if one WAS intending to receive (or would now like to) and just failed to fast properly, then perhaps THAT is where the impropriety existed.

And you can’t presume automatic forgiveness even of venial sin upon reception of communion - it doesn’t work like a candy machine. To be forgiven you must be genuinely contrite for your sin.

As I said.

 

[Distressed]

The thing we are missing here is that everyone is NOT required to receive Holy Communion every time they attend Mass… One should NOT receive and simply plan better the next week… The rule is not made to be bent, but followed!

Exactly. That fact seems to be lost on a great many here.

 

[Distressed]

Aside from age/medical problems, where’s the breaking point? 5 minutes? 10? 15? 20? “before the homily?” “before the consecration?”

The Church has been very generous in Her wisdom to shorten the fast from midnight the night before to three hours before receiving to one hour before receiving.

If you suggest that “it’s OK because I only missed by xy minutes” then you are blind to the reason for the fast. If you think there is a difference between “missing” by 1 versus 59 minutes then you really don’t know what’s going on.

Obey the fast or don’t receive. Quit trying to bend or slither around the Church’s rules with chants of “I don’t think this will keep me from heaven” or “this is so scrupulous…”

 

[starling]

Well of course, if you eat 55 minutes before Communion, you will go straight to Hell should you get run over by a bus on the way out of church. Scrupulosity, folks. Only the orthodox police would make a big deal about 5 minutes. Maybe your watch is slow. And I don’t think you need a Priest to tell you if your condition qualifies for less time. You have your own formed conscience, hopefully.

When I was about 10, a fairly devout favourite relative of mine died of sudden cardiac death, literally while waiting in line for the Confessional in the main part of the church. Maybe he had a big sin to confess, maybe not. Whatever it was, he never got to confess it, and he didn’t have time for a perfect act of contrition either. I don’t think for a moment that God is so vindictive that a person would be penalized for eternity in such circumstances, nor that 5 minutes either way makes much difference to God who probably experiences all the time of eternity all at once. The whole pre-Communion fast has no basis in physiology anyway.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Well of course, if you eat 55 minutes before Communion, you will go straight to Hell should you get run over by a bus on the way out of church. Scrupulosity, folks. Only the orthodox police would make a big deal about 5 minutes. Maybe your watch is slow. And I don’t think you need a Priest to tell you if your condition qualifies for less time. You have your own formed conscience, hopefully.

Unless you will be deprived of the Grace of the Sacrament for an extended time if you do not receive now. It’s best to plan one hour before Mass not Holy Communion. Then you will not be counting minutes.

 

[chicago]

Unless you will be deprived of the Grace of the Sacrament for an extended time if you do not receive now. It’s best to plan one hour before Mass not Holy Communion. Then you will not be counting minutes.

I’d agree with this suggestion. Though I’ve also seen where people who understood the fast to be necessarily a period before Mass starts to fret just the same.

 

[Distressed]

**Well of course, if you eat 55 minutes before Communion, you will go straight to Hell should you get run over by a bus on the way out of church. **Scrupulosity, folks. Only the orthodox police would make a big deal about 5 minutes. Maybe your watch is slow. And I don’t think you need a Priest to tell you if your condition qualifies for less time. You have your own formed conscience, hopefully…

Do you think a comment like that somehow makes it OK to disregard Church rules? Does it somehow make you more wise than the Church?

You underscore your non-understanding of this issue with your “5 minutes” comment. How is 5 different from 10 or 15 or 20 or 25 or 30 or 35 or 40 or 45 or 50 or 55 minutes? in this instance?

“Close” counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. The Church is neither…