Taking Eucharist 55min after eating

[mari1234]

Hi All,

So I have read some previous posts on eating before Mass. I know it is a sin to eat 1 hour before receiving the Eucharist.

I’ve been having these headaches. If I don’t eat my head starts hurt more than it already does and I didn’t want to drive home after Mass and risk feeling horrible or worse get in accident from being light headed.

So I ate at and finished at 4:45pm, I thought that should be enough time of an hour to take Communion for a Mass that starts at 5pm. The priest did not talk very much and I went to recieve the Eucharist at around 5:40pm.

I am I being scrupulous about the hour fasting or should I be concerned about the fact that I wasn’t hour before eating?

PS is eating before one hour recieving communion a grave sin?

 

[Detroit_Sue]

[Canon 919](Canon 919) makes allowances for those who are ill, but my suggestion would be to ask your priest in the confessional. That way, if your case doesn’t meet the guidelines, you can be absolved right away. And yes, if not eating causes or worsens your headaches, just have something light ten minutes earlier than normal. If it bothers you, then the confessional is the place to state it. God bless!
Sue

 

[Distressed]

Hi All,

So I have read some previous posts on eating before Mass. I know it is a sin to eat 1 hour before receiving the Eucharist.

I’ve been having these headaches. If I don’t eat my head starts hurt more than it already does and I didn’t want to drive home after Mass and risk feeling horrible or worse get in accident from being light headed.

So I ate at and finished at 4:45pm, I thought that should be enough time of an hour to take Communion for a Mass that starts at 5pm. The priest did not talk very much and I went to recieve the Eucharist at around 5:40pm.

I am I being scrupulous about the hour fasting or should I be concerned about the fact that I wasn’t hour before eating?

PS is eating before one hour recieving communion a grave sin?

Plan your meal so you finish no later than 4:30. Problem solved.

 

[LilyM]

Plan your meal so you finish no later than 4:30. Problem solved.

I second this. Depending on which church and which Mass I attend, it can vary from almost completley sung (in which case it can be nearly an hour before communion even commences) to completely musicless, in which case it can be 35 minutes or so.

A good rule of thumb is to assume about hallf an hour after the commencement of Mass for a Sunday. For a daily Mass, of course, you can barely even count on 15 minutes sometimes!!!

Bear in mind that it isn’t compulsory to receive Communion, so if in doubt or if you really must eat prior to Mass it’s far better just not to receive.

 

[Eireann]

Hi All,

So I have read some previous posts on eating before Mass. I know it is a sin to eat 1 hour before receiving the Eucharist.

I’ve been having these headaches. If I don’t eat my head starts hurt more than it already does and I didn’t want to drive home after Mass and risk feeling horrible or worse get in accident from being light headed.

So I ate at and finished at 4:45pm, I thought that should be enough time of an hour to take Communion for a Mass that starts at 5pm. The priest did not talk very much and I went to receive the Eucharist at around 5:40pm.

I am I being scrupulous about the hour fasting or should I be concerned about the fact that I wasn’t hour before eating?

PS is eating before one hour receiving communion a grave sin?

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.

 

[puzzleannie]

you intended to allow an hour but it did not work out, no sin. don’t get scrupulous, it will give you a headache. If you have a medical condition like diabetes and you must eat, you are not bound by the fast in any case, but you will probably do best to mention this fact to your priest the next time you are in confession and ask for permission to eat before Mass if you have to. Please do not neglect finding out the cause for the headaches, that really would be a grave matter.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Hi All,

So I have read some previous posts on eating before Mass. I know it is a sin to eat 1 hour before receiving the Eucharist.

I’ve been having these headaches. If I don’t eat my head starts hurt more than it already does and I didn’t want to drive home after Mass and risk feeling horrible or worse get in accident from being light headed.

So I ate at and finished at 4:45pm, I thought that should be enough time of an hour to take Communion for a Mass that starts at 5pm. The priest did not talk very much and I went to recieve the Eucharist at around 5:40pm.

I am I being scrupulous about the hour fasting or should I be concerned about the fact that I wasn’t hour before eating?

PS is eating before one hour recieving communion a grave sin?

Well in this case have you seen a doctor about the headachs? If this is not a medical necessity to eat like diabeties or something then you should not receive. Also if you will be returning to Mass within a month or two you should simply wait until next week.

 

[Ron_Conte]

Receiving holy Communion is important to salvation:
[John]
{6:54} And so, Jesus said to them: “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you will not have life in you.
{6:55} Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

Fasting before Communion is good and fitting, but it is of much lesser importance that receiving Communion.

In the early Church, they even took other foods during the celebration of the Mass, with the Eucharist. This was also the case at the first Eucharist (the Last Supper).

In the case of having fasted for 55 minutes, because you anticipated that it would be a full hour, and because you have a medical condition, you could receive Communion in good conscience and without even objective sin.

Since this seems to be a continuing issue, I suggest that you write a letter to the Bishop of your diocese, explain your situation, and ask for a dispensation from fasting before Communion.

Canon Law permits not only the infirm (a very general and mild term), but also the elderly, and even those who care for them, to receive Communion even if they have eaten in the preceding hour. Therefore, Canon Law itself does not insist on a rigid adherence to its own external precepts.

The idea that someone should not receive Jesus Christ our Savior in holy Communion, merely because they fasted for only 55 minutes instead of an hour places an external precept of Canon law above the weightier things of the Faith: judgment and mercy and love and a Sacrament.

I do not believe that there is a Bishop on the face of the earth, liberal or conservative, faithful or unfaithful, who would tell someone not to receive Communion when they in good conscience had attempted to make their fast one hour, AND they have headaches and light-headedness if they don’t eat, AND the fast was only 5 minutes short of an hour.

Ron Conte

 

[Distressed]

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.

Canon law states, “One who is to receive the most Holy Eucharist is to abstain from any food or drink, with the exception only of water and medicine, for at least the period of one hour before Holy Communion” (CIC 919 §1). Elderly people, those who are ill, and their caretakers are excused from the Eucharistic fast (CIC 191 §3). Priests and deacons may not dispense one obligated by the Eucharistic fast unless the bishop has expressly granted such power to them (cf. CIC 89).

Under normal circumstances if one received Holy Communion knowing they had eaten within an hour they would not be worthily receiving the Eucharist. Worrying about this is NOT a matter of “scrupulosity.”

 

[demerzel85]

Personally, I really find it silly when people start looking at their watches during Communion to check if the queue is long enough to meet the 1 hour fast. This is the period of time where one is supposed to prepare oneself to receive the body of Christ. Constantly looking at the watch really is a distraction.

And this is why for myself, I fast for 1 hour before Mass. The extra time is just penance. The reception of the Eucharist is also not some form of attendance sheet to see if you have gone for Mass or not. It is perfectly fine to go for Mass and not receive.

Yet, if a medical condition prevents one from doing the fast, go check with your priest

 

[Distressed]

I do not believe that there is a Bishop on the face of the earth, liberal or conservative, faithful or unfaithful, who would tell someone not to receive Communion when they in good conscience had attempted to make their fast one hour, AND they have headaches and light-headedness if they don’t eat, AND the fast was only 5 minutes short of an hour.

Ron Conte

My bishop would not advise someone to receive Holy Communion if the person was aware they would be violating the one hour fast in doing so. Five minutes is no different than 45 minutes in this case. So there’s one…

 

[Distressed]

Personally, I really find it silly when people start looking at their watches during Communion to check if the queue is long enough to meet the 1 hour fast. This is the period of time where one is supposed to prepare oneself to receive the body of Christ. Constantly looking at the watch really is a distraction.

Personally, I really find it tragic when people start to give others advice about ignoring the Church’s rules…

 

[AlexV]

Yes, worrying about 55 minutes versus 60 minutes IS scruplosity…

The woman had headaches (i.e., was/is ill). So first off, we’re not even talking about someone who had to keep the Eucharistic fast.

If someone deliberately said “I’m don’t care about the fast, I will eat when I want,”…well, there you have a pretty good case for a sin.

But if someone had the “mens” = intention of keeping the fast, and was caught by 1 minute, or 2 minutes…sorry, that’s not in the category of sin.

What’s next? Stopwatches calibrated to the second? You’re in scrupulosity there.

 

[Eireann]

Canon law states, “One who is to receive the most Holy Eucharist is to abstain from any food or drink, with the exception only of water and medicine, for at least the period of one hour before Holy Communion” (CIC 919 §1). Elderly people, those who are ill, and their caretakers are excused from the Eucharistic fast (CIC 191 §3). Priests and deacons may not dispense one obligated by the Eucharistic fast unless the bishop has expressly granted such power to them (cf. CIC 89).

Under normal circumstances if one received Holy Communion knowing they had eaten within an hour they would not be worthily receiving the Eucharist. Worrying about this is NOT a matter of “scrupulosity.”

Bad advice from the priest, probably.

 

[Walking_Home]

Receiving holy Communion is important to salvation:
[John]
{6:54} And so, Jesus said to them: “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you will not have life in you.
{6:55} Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

Fasting before Communion is good and fitting, but it is of much lesser importance that receiving Communion.

In the early Church, they even took other foods during the celebration of the Mass, with the Eucharist. This was also the case at the first Eucharist (the Last Supper).

In the case of having fasted for 55 minutes, because you anticipated that it would be a full hour, and because you have a medical condition, you could receive Communion in good conscience and without even objective sin.

Since this seems to be a continuing issue, I suggest that you write a letter to the Bishop of your diocese, explain your situation, and ask for a dispensation from fasting before Communion.

Canon Law permits not only the infirm (a very general and mild term), but also the elderly, and even those who care for them, to receive Communion even if they have eaten in the preceding hour. Therefore, Canon Law itself does not insist on a rigid adherence to its own external precepts.
The idea that someone should not receive Jesus Christ our Savior in holy Communion, merely because they fasted for only 55 minutes instead of an hour places an external precept of Canon law above the weightier things of the Faith: judgment and mercy and love and a Sacrament.

I do not believe that there is a Bishop on the face of the earth, liberal or conservative, faithful or unfaithful, who would tell someone not to receive Communion when they in good conscience had attempted to make their fast one hour, AND they have headaches and light-headedness if they don’t eat, AND the fast was only 5 minutes short of an hour.

Ron Conte

---

Canon law is specific as to who is exempt from the Eucharistic fast. It does not open the door to the general population to disregard this fast.

To prepare for the worthy reception of Holy Communion involves both the spiritual and the physical. Once we start to disregard the fast —we then fall into treating unworthy the Body and Blood of our Lord----sacriledge.

What the “early” Church may or may not have done is irrelevant in this discussion.

Here I am not saying that the unintentional by a few minutes–missing the complete 1 hr. fast—would be sacriledge.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

1387 To prepare for worthy reception of this sacrament, the faithful should observe the fast required in their Church. 218 Bodily demeanor (gestures, clothing) ought to convey the respect, solemnity, and joy of this moment when Christ becomes our guest.

2120 Sacrilege consists in profaning or treating unworthily the sacraments and other liturgical actions, as well as persons, things, or places consecrated to God. Sacrilege is a grave sin especially when committed against the Eucharist, for in this sacrament the true Body of Christ is made substantially present for us.52

 

[AlexV]

Moral theology does not envisage missing the Eucharistic fast as being a question of “sacrilege”.

 

[Coder]

What is the purpose of the fast? The purpose is to turn attention to Jesus and there may also be a sacrificial aspect. In regards to the purpose of the fast, 55 minutes is not much different than an hour. We have to look through the eyes of love. I am not quick to think that eating because of legitimate pain to cause “unworthiness”. The canon law that stated that an ill person may be excused seems to possibly refer to exceptional cases from time to time and not only to official dispensation for chronological conditions. Perhaps someone can clarify.

My understanding is that if someone is in pain let them come to Jesus for healing including the power of the Eucharist.

At that same time we must be careful that legitmate reasons don’t allow us to be lax about the fast.

 

[AlexV]

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.

 

[Rara_Avis]

Where I come from the fast is 3 hrs - If I only had to fast an hour before Communion - I wouldn’t even consider that a fast .

Let’s see it takes me a 1/2 hr to drive to mass, arrive 1/2hr early for confession and Rosary and than another 1/2 hr from the time Mass starts to Communion … yup I’d say that is making life way too easy. I’ve already fasted 1 1/2 and hasn’t been an ounce of skin off my nose.

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.

 

[Walking_Home]

Moral theology does not envisage missing the Eucharistic fast as being a question of “sacrilege”.

---

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.

Again—I am not stating that being off by a few minutes is sacriledge or that those who need medicine or are exempt because of age or illness are committing sacriledge.