Wife asked why I didn't receive Communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Boswell
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I never implied avoiding the Sacrament, just restitution and reconciliation with those offended or hurt.
 
rcwitness said:
Then we agree that some things could be very personal sins against spouse or children, and so the spouse, being as intimately woven in life as they are, has a lot of reason to ask. Many sins can greatly affect, or already has affected them. And sins that don’t affect them, they don’t strictly need to know, yet can righteously ask in order to help.

Also, the one who is not receiving, should be willing to put any genuine worry to peace, since he is the one at variance with Jesus.
Click to expand...
The spouse has ZERO reason to ask, because the spouse is not the confessor.

Getting right with God is the purpose of confession, not the purpose of spilling everything to one’s spouse.
 
Last edited:
Healing and reconciling with one another is the purpose of confession.
 
I mean, in a way I can understand just based on the understanding of marriage. The two shall become one. There should be no secrets between spouses.

That said… I also know I wouldn’t ever ask my husband why he was not receiving nor would I ask what he confessed in confession as to me that’s for him to share only if he wishes.

So I can kind of understand the point being made but don’t 100% agree with it.
 
Not always. Sometimes it is also making ourselves right with others which is why penance will sometimes include having to apologize to the people we wronged.
 
I really haven’t ever met a couple that was in the habit of telling each other every single thing that pops into their heads at any given moment. Sins don’t have to be blatant acts as we all know.

Having been married as long as I have, I can’t say I think that would work, either.
 
Last edited:
Hey, I’m with you but I know it is sometimes the expectation and it certainly falls in line with what is taught about marriage.

Not what I personally would want as we all think things we shouldn’t say at times but I’ve read enough things about Catholic marriage that i can see why some would advocate for it.
 
I can’t see how anyone married for more than a minute would advocate for it, Catholic or not.

Because it sounds great on paper - and I think we all think it’s supposed to be that way. Then you’re married for a while and you realize, hold up - seriously, I really don’t want to know everything, and I really also need to be my own person at some point.

I’m not talking about harboring a secret life either - nothing even remotely that extreme. I actually don’t have any secret squirrel stuff because no one has time for that sort of thing in the real world - but I do have thoughts that are 100% my own, and what I tell a priest behind the seal of confession is also 100% off limits, unless I choose to share. (In reality I lead a pretty boring life, LOL, for the record.)
 
Last edited:
Pup7 said:
I really haven’t ever met a couple that was in the habit of telling each other every single thing that pops into their heads at any given moment. Sins don’t have to be blatant acts as we all know.
Click to expand...
Can we get past this mellow dramatic exaggeration?
 
Last edited:
rcwitness said:
Can we get past this mellow dramatic exaggeration?
Click to expand...
Can you stop the impulse for metering what I feel I want to say?

It’s not melodramatic - it’s a statement. Don’t like it - scroll past it. That post wasn’t even addressed to you.
 
Last edited:
No one is saying anyone has to tell their spouse everything that comes to their mind, or details of every sin.
 
ProdglArchitect said:
The way you put this makes it sounds like that’s not actually the reason.
Click to expand...
4 days and 230 posts later and I’m still hoping @Boswell will come back to this thread and respond to this. I could never tell if this was the real reason or a made-up reason to avoid the real reason. The answer changes things quite a bit…

I have a lot of sympathy for his situation, as I’m in a similar boat. My wife will typically ask when I skip communion, so I have a keen interest in this thread and have enjoyed seeing both sides fleshed out. After several iterations of going through this with her, I’ve learned two things:
  • she is certainly doing so out of concern for my soul and general well-being, not because she’s judging me or worried that I sinned against her
  • things work out much better if I tell her in advance that I’m planning to skip it (sometimes I tell her why, sometimes I don’t, depending on the situation), then she at least doesn’t have this sudden moment of worry and no information about how serious it is
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
b) the teaching in the Catechism where it says that any lie is a sin and have done away with the old exception for people who didn’t have a right to the information. Under the old information, one could argue that spouse didn’t have a right to ask you what you said in confession (as someone else said they were taught, back in the day). But now that’s gone out the window.
Click to expand...
@Tis_Bearself, can you provide some reference backing this up? I have been trying to dig further into this after reading many of the recent “lying” threads on CAF and what I’ve found seems to indicate the opposite: that’s there a growing movement heading towards the “someone who has the right to know the truth” formulation, as evidenced by the fact that that almost made it into the final version of the current catechism.

I’m getting that from the CAF article Is Lying Ever Right?:

Over the past hundred years there has been a growing movement among moral theologians to tweak the definition of lying as follows: “To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead into error someone who has the right to know the truth.” This very sentence, in fact, is taken from the initial edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 2483, 1994 edition).

When the Catechism was first published in French in 1994, and translated into other languages from the French, it contained the sentence quoted above, and so there was some speculation that the Holy See had finally decided to throw at least a modicum of magisterial weight behind this solution to our dilemma [murderers at your door looking for their victim]. This very precise definition, with its inclusion of the right to know, enables us to handle lying and falsehood in a manner very similar to the way we handle murder and killing. Through a person’s intention to use particular knowledge for an evil end, that person would presumably forfeit his right to know. Thus it would be morally acceptable to speak a falsehood to the murderous thugs. But we would no more call this “lying” than we would call an act of self-defense “murder.”

Alas, the matter is not so easily resolved. For, as it turns out, when the official Latin text of the Catechism was released in 1997 after a process of revision, the right to know was dropped. The operative sentence now reads simply: “To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error.
 
Last edited:
rcwitness said:
No one is saying anyone has to tell their spouse everything that comes to their mind, or details of every sin.
Click to expand...
I’m going off your comments.

You have stated time and time again that a spouse has a right to ask why someone isn’t receiving and that the other person should likely tell them. What if it’s because they don’t feel right receiving because of some non-mortal sin that is bugging that person and has nothing to do with the spouse? It’s not the spouse’s business. That’s my point. You seem to be advocating against privacy of thought. What if the other person just isn’t ready to talk at the moment? What if the car ride on the way home isn’t the place? Even married people have boundaries and lines that the other person just knows not to cross. Everyone has limits - absolutely everyone.
rcwitness said:
And why would that be so wrong to simply explain? Why accuse your spouse of being out of line, intrusive, and lacking trust?
Click to expand...
Because it’s pretty darn distrustful to be asked what sins I’ve committed just because I chose to not receive Communion. That’s why.
rcwitness said:
A spouse is not public, but the person with the Sacrament of marriage surrounding each other. And you fail to realize that some sins (maybe not you and your spouse who are above reproach, I’m speaking about those of us who struggle with serious sins) have harmful affects on the family. Some sins are apparent, yet the perpetrator cannot bring themselves to apologize! And it’s a perpetual hurt.
Click to expand...
You seem to assume that not taking Communion must mean that the refuser has committed some grave sin that is directly against the spouse. Maybe I snapped at my mom the day before and I’m still uncomfortable with it and want to go to Confession about it after thinking it over. It’s not necessarily about the other person sitting next to them. And it’s always about the person and their relationship with God.
 
Last edited:
The CAF article section you quoted, “A Promising Lead”, provides the exact section of the Catechism that changed to which I am referring.
I’m not sure how you’re reading something else into the article.

In any event, you don’t want to be lying to your spouse.
 
Actually it seems a little odd to me to be overthinking or even thinking about why someone else does not receive communion.

We are obligated to attend Mass every Sunday or Saturday vigil, as well as Holy Days of obligation. We are not obligated to receive communion at every Mass. We are only obligated to receive communion once a year. A person might elect to refrain from communion for many reasons or for no reason. Not necessarily having anything to do with sin. In my younger days it was common for people to skip communion if they had not been to confession on Saturday, mortal sins or not. And of course one would skip communion if he had taken a drink of water that morning, accidentally or on purpose. Nobody questioned it, and not everyone went to communion on any given Sunday.
 
Last edited:
Well you believe and practice what you like, but don’t accuse couples who acknowledge a privilege to share serious damage to each other’s relationship with The Lord they are married into.

Both out of charity for the one refraining, and a right to know what may have serious consequences on their wellbeing or their children.

Blessed is the spouse who welcomes their spouses concern, and respects them enough to amend what they may have done to their spouse, or children, or simply puts their heart at ease that it’s nothing that has harmed anyone, and they are bringing it to the Sacrament.
 
Last edited:
somecanadian said:
The two shall become one. There should be no secrets between spouses.
Click to expand...
Two shall become one FLESH. Sexual marital union.

Not one soul, not one mind, not one heart.

The “no secrets” idea is an opinion, it is not Catholic doctrine nor part of the Catholic understanding of the Sacrament of marriage.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
The CAF article section you quoted, “A Promising Lead”, provides the exact section of the Catechism that changed to which I am referring.
I’m not sure how you’re reading something else into the article.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I should have been more clear in my question. You presented it as the “right to know” used to be included, but now the new catechism has definitively ruled that out. Whereas the article I quoted says we are moving towards “right to know” being accepted. And indeed, I don’t find any evidence that “right to know” used to be the rule, for example, the Baltimore Catechism is largely the same as the new one: “A lie is a sin committed by knowingly saying what is untrue with the intention of deceiving.”

I know what the current one says. I’m trying to confirm your contention that it used to be that way (“right to know”) and now the door is firmly closed.

My interest is not so much re this thread (and the idea of “your spouse has no right to know”), but I’m more interested in the larger definition of lying and Church teaching (because, frankly, I find the current formulation fairly unworkable without the “right to know” element).

And I certainly don’t lie to my wife. Well, it depends on whose CAF definition we use. I do plan surprises for her, so I “lie” then 😜
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top