Took Eucharist without Fasting

[StMartinTours]

I went to a weekday Mass the other day. I was aware that I had eaten less than an hour before communion time and I did not intend to take communion, but then when communion time came I became absent-minded and took communion anyway. In your opinion, what is my level of culpability for this lapse and how should I make reparation for it? Should I confess it as a sin?

 

[Diana_Catherine]

I went to a weekday Mass the other day. I was aware that I had eaten less than an hour before communion time and I did not intend to take communion, but then when communion time came I became absent-minded and took communion anyway. In your opinion, what is my level of culpability for this lapse and how should I make reparation for it? Should I confess it as a sin?

It is funny how sometimes we do things and then later realize it wasn’t the right decision.I would just go to confession. God is so merciful and understanding.

 

[onceablasphemer]

I went to a weekday Mass the other day. I was aware that I had eaten less than an hour before communion time and I did not intend to take communion, but then when communion time came I became absent-minded and took communion anyway. In your opinion, what is my level of culpability for this lapse and how should I make reparation for it? Should I confess it as a sin?

Mortal sin requires **full **consent of the will but you should go to confession and speak to a priest. Did you know you were going to Mass before you started to eat? Also, did you eat an hour before Mass begins or an hour before communion?

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Since it was just a mental lapse, I don’t see why there should be any moral culpability.

Also, I’ve heard a Catholic apologist make the claim that the Eucharistic fast is not something like the Sunday Obligation where failing to observe it is grave matter. If this assertion was correct, consciously blowing off the fast would therefore in and of itself be a venial sin, not mortal. Although, of course, most Catholics seem to assume it’s grave matter, which could make it a mortal sin for them due to that subjective misunderstanding.

But again, if you never decided to break the fasting discipline it would not seem to be any kind of sin, unless there was some sin of omission involved in your inattentiveness itself.

 

[TrueLight]

I think that with all laws, focus should not be on how culpable one is technically. It’s important to understand the reason for the laws.

Here are some thoughts on the reason for the Eucharistic Fast.
ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur368.htm

"From the very earliest time the custom was observed of administering the Eucharist to the faithful who were fasting. Toward the end of the fourth century fasting was prescribed by many Councils for those who were going to celebrate the Eucharistic Sacrifice. So it was that the Council of Hippo in the year 393 issued this decree: ‘The Sacrament of the altar shall be offered only by those who are fasting.’ Shortly afterward, in the year 397, the Third Council of Carthage issued this same command, using the very same words. At the beginning of the fifth century this custom can be called quite common and immemorial. Hence St. Augustine affirms that the Holy Eucharist is always received by people who are fasting and likewise that this custom is observed throughout the entire world.

"Doubtless this way of doing things was based upon very serious reasons, among which there can be mentioned first of all the one the Apostle of the Gentiles deplores when he is dealing with the brotherly love-feast of the Christians. Abstinence from food and drink is in accord with that supreme reverence we owe to the supreme majesty of Jesus Christ when we are going to receive Him hidden under the veils of the Eucharist. And moreover, when we receive His precious Body and Blood before we take any food, we show clearly that this is the first and loftiest nourishment by which our soul is fed and its holiness increased. Hence the same St. Augustine gives this warning: ‘It has pleased the Holy Ghost that, to honor so great a Sacrament, the Lord’s Body should enter the mouth of the Christian before other food.’

"Not only does the Eucharistic fast pay due honor to our Divine Redeemer, it fosters piety also; and hence it can help to increase in us those most salutary fruits of holiness which Christ, the Source and Author of all good, wishes us who are enriched by His Grace to bring forth.

Why waste time wondering how culpable you were or not? Since you obviously have doubt, bring it up at your next confession.

 

[ConstantineTG]

You want to know if you sinned, seek the counsel of a priest.

 

[Bookcat]

Since it was just a mental lapse, I don’t see why there should be any moral culpability.

Also, I’ve heard a Catholic apologist make the claim that the Eucharistic fast is not something like the Sunday Obligation where failing to observe it is grave matter. If this assertion was correct, consciously blowing off the fast would therefore in and of itself be a venial sin, not mortal. Although, of course, most Catholics seem to assume it’s grave matter, which could make it a mortal sin for them due to that subjective misunderstanding.

But again, if you never decided to break the fasting discipline it would not seem to be any kind of sin, unless there was some sin of omission involved in your inattentiveness itself.

Is the Eucharistic fast a grave matter?

It has long been considered a grave matter (indeed which did not admit of parvity (smallness) of matter).

Though I have read that some moralists think that it admits of parvity of matter.

Catholic Answers’ apologist take on it (it is grave):

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=475644&highlight=eucharistic+fast

(and by the way there are exceptions in the law…see regarding the sick etc)

(I will note though for some readers out there who are scrupulous – discuss your situation with your regular confessor – this is not something to scruple over --I note this some can do just that)

---

As to the OP –

Mortal sin involves not just grave matter–but full knowledge and deliberate consent.

If one in good faith forgot one did not fast --that is simply what occurred --you forgot. But you will have to judge what happened ( I was elsewhere…)–or one can take it up in confession --noting what happened.

 

[TimothyH]

I think that with all laws, focus should not be on how culpable one is technically. It’s important to understand the reason for the laws.

Here are some thoughts on the reason for the Eucharistic Fast.
ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur368.htm

Why waste time wondering how culpable you were or not? Since you obviously have doubt, bring it up at your next confession.

Culpability is important. Sin is objective, but a good confessor will try to determine culpability - how much blame one bears - in order to determine the seriousness of the sin.

One who forgets and breaks the fast is not as culpable as one who knows the rules, has been catechized, yet habitually stops for donuts and coffee on the way to Mass. The former made a mistake while the latter has a serious problem with their faith. Both are objectively the same sin but one is not as serious as the other. Good confessors are able to discern these differences and provide guidance and pennance as appropriate.

Contraception is one area where culpability is extremely important. I support contraception when I support an organization that sells contraception, and so when I shop at a store that sells contraception I sin. Sin is objective. But I cannot find a grocery store or pharmacy in my area which does not sell contraception. I sin, but I have greatly reduced culpability because I have no choice.

I work for a company which has abortion providers among its customers, therefor I sin. But how culpable am I? Do I speak out? Do I accept assignments to do work for those organizations? Should I change my job? Can I change my job in this economy? All of this determines how much blame I bear for the murder of innocent infants.

The bottom line is that I will stand in judgement for these things when I die. Sin is objective, but how much blame we bear will determine which way justice falls. A good confessor will be able to discern these issues and be able to tell when people suffer from scrupulosity.

-Tim-

 

[Bookcat]

Is the Eucharistic fast a grave matter?

It has long been considered a grave matter (indeed which did not admit of parvity (smallness) of matter).

Though I have read that some moralists think that it admits of parvity of matter.

Catholic Answers’ apologist take on it (it is grave):

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=475644&highlight=eucharistic+fast

(and by the way there are exceptions in the law…see regarding the sick etc)

(I will note though for some readers out there who are scrupulous – discuss your situation with your regular confessor – this is not something to scruple over --I note this some can do just that)

Addition and quote from Jimmy Akin to the contrary --from other thread: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9316741&postcount=12

 

[TrueLight]

Culpability is important. Sin is objective, but a good confessor will try to determine culpability - how much blame one bears - in order to determine the seriousness of the sin.

One who forgets and breaks the fast is not as culpable as one who knows the rules, has been catechized, yet habitually stops for donuts and coffee on the way to Mass. The former made a mistake while the latter has a serious problem with their faith. Both are objectively the same sin but one is not as serious as the other. Good confessors are able to discern these differences and provide guidance and pennance as appropriate.

Contraception is one area where culpability is extremely important. I support contraception when I support an organization that sells contraception, and so when I shop at a store that sells contraception I sin. Sin is objective. But I cannot find a grocery store or pharmacy in my area which does not sell contraception. I sin, but I have greatly reduced culpability because I have no choice.

I work for a company which has abortion providers among its customers, therefor I sin. But how culpable am I? Do I speak out? Do I accept assignments to do work for those organizations? Should I change my job? Can I change my job in this economy? All of this determines how much blame I bear for the murder of innocent infants.

The bottom line is that I will stand in judgement for these things when I die. Sin is objective, but how much blame we bear will determine which way justice falls. A good confessor will be able to discern these issues and be able to tell when people suffer from scrupulosity.

-Tim-

Notice I spoke of “technical” culpability.

For example, if I have a cup of coffee and finish at 10:58, mass starts at 11 and communion is at 12PM, I am not technically culpable of breaking the fast, but do I really understand the spirit of the law? I have been guilty of that by the way.

I feel strongly that one’s focus should not be legalistic, but should be based on the love and fear of God. All the Canon law is there for a reason and one needs to understand the reasons.

If I have any doubt that I sinned, then I will one ask God for forgiveness for even being remiss and then I will bring it up to my confessor.

 

[Joannm]

Notice I spoke of “technical” culpability.

For example, if I have a cup of coffee and finish at 10:58, mass starts at 11 and communion is at 12PM, I am not technically culpable of breaking the fast, but do I really understand the spirit of the law? I have been guilty of that by the way.

I feel strongly that one’s focus should not be legalistic, but should be based on the love and fear of God. All the Canon law is there for a reason and one needs to understand the reasons.

If I have any doubt that I sinned, then I will one ask God for forgiveness for even being remiss and then I will bring it up to my confessor.

I agree that our focus should not be legalistic. I too have eaten things before Mass thinking I had enough time, but the priest might have decided to have a short homily, or said the mass a bit too quickly and I found myself less than an hour since I ate. I go to communion, because it was not my intention to break the fast. I really don’t think it is that serious an offense. I have seen priests run into the sacristy right before Mass with a cup of coffee. I know they are allowed to eat something between masses if they are celebrating two in a row but our priests only serve one mass in a day even on Sunday.

 

[Bookcat]

I agree that our focus should not be legalistic. I too have eaten things before Mass thinking I had enough time, but the priest might have decided to have a short homily, or said the mass a bit too quickly and I found myself less than an hour since I ate.

I would not that It is “legalistic” to observe the Eucharistic fast as an hour (not sayin you said it was …).

That is what it is- 1 hour. We are to fast at least an hour before Holy Communion.

If I know I have not fasted for that hour --I simply can make a spiritual communion and do not receive. Pope Benedict prior to being Pope mentioned even on occasion the good of deliberately abstaining from Holy Communion when one could otherwise receive in union with those who can not (as I recall -he may have been referring to those who are say being persecuted and do not even have the possibility of communion.

(or if one has not yet received that day one may ask to receive after Mass once the hour has been observed).

While one ought to not scruple of course - the fast is “at least an hour” before Communion (see the CIC for the exceptions…such as regarding Priests celebrating multiple Masses)

 

[Bookcat]

(this is not referring to what I earlier noted he said…this is something different)

(The following memorandum was sent by Cardinal Ratzinger to Cardinal McCarrick and was made public in the first week of July 2004- about a year before being elected Pope)

“Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion should be a conscious decision, based on a reasoned judgment regarding one’s worthiness to do so, according to the Church’s objective criteria, asking such questions as: “Am I in full communion with the Catholic Church? Am I guilty of grave sin? Have I incurred a penalty (e.g. excommunication, interdict) that forbids me to receive Holy Communion? Have I prepared myself by fasting for at least an hour?” The practice of indiscriminately presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion, merely as a consequence of being present at Mass, is an abuse that must be corrected (cf. Instruction “Redemptionis Sacramentum,” nos. 81, 83).”

(it does not cover everything of course --but note what he says about the fast)

ewtn.com/library/CURIA/cdfworthycom.HTM

 

[arkwright]

I went to a weekday Mass the other day. I was aware that I had eaten less than an hour before communion time and I did not intend to take communion, but then when communion time came I became absent-minded and took communion anyway. In your opinion, what is my level of culpability for this lapse and how should I make reparation for it? Should I confess it as a sin?

You were absent-minded .

I take it that it was a genuine mistake .

If so , don’t confess it because you have not sinned .

God is our Father , not an ogre .