Wife asked why I didn't receive Communion

[rcwitness]

Nope, these are not anxieties, I was just making a point that there are many reasons people may choose not to receive, and it’s no big deal. To address one of your comments. One must fast from all food and liquids with the exception of water and medicine for one hour before communion. Failing to do so and knowingly receiving anyway is a mortal sin. Yes, this is a teaching of the Church.

So is it a big deal or Not?

Your point was to offer examples of refraining from Eucharist which were not mortal sin.

So if you deliberately ate food within an hour of Communion, you won’t receive until you Confess in the Sacrament, but have a huge issue with telling your spouse That?

The other reasons you gave were only your personal preference, and the Church does not ask you to refrain for those reasons.

 

[tafan2]

Great, you and your wife are always there for each other. You trust each other and discuss all your sins. Those previously mentioned news reports of unfaithful husbands means other couples can’t completely trust each other, but not you.
Here is the problem, the contradiction in you logic:. For the discussion at hand, the spouse who didn’t go to communion explicitly decided not to tell the other spouse about their sin. They explicitly decided they did not want the help. So questioning them is improper and it does show a lack of trust. It shows that you don’t trust their decision to keep their sin private.

 

[tafan2]

So if you deliberately ate food within an hour of Communion, you won’t receive until you Confess in the Sacrament, but have a huge issue with telling your spouse

You are being deliberately obtuse. She did not say she sinned by receiving communion after eating on the way to mass. She said she did not receive because she ate on the way to mass. The former is sinful (assuming communion is less that an hour later). The latter is obviously not.

 

[rcwitness]

So what is your point?

She told me these were examples that were NOT sin, but reasons why someone would refrain from Eucharist.

Other than that example, which actually is about sin, the other reasons are not because the Church even suggests that we don’t receive, but based on anxieties that the individual struggles with.

I am free to feel sorry for those anxieties. I thinks it’s too bad for someone to feel they should refrain for those reasons.

 

[rcwitness]

Great, you and your wife are always there for each other. You trust each other and discuss all your sins. Those previously mentioned news reports of unfaithful husbands means other couples can’t completely trust each other, but not you.
Here is the problem, the contradiction in you logic:. For the discussion at hand, the spouse who didn’t go to communion explicitly decided not to tell the other spouse about their sin. They explicitly decided they did not want the help. So questioning them is improper and it does show a lack of trust. It shows that you don’t trust their decision to keep their sin private.

Who are you talking about? The OP?

 

[Edmundus1581]

Husbands and wives need not and really should not be confessors to each other. That’s what priests are for. Would husbands and wives discuss with each other what they confesses in the confessional? That’s why I think the question was inappropriate.

Totally agree, especially if it’s a one way communication - ie. she get’s his dirty secrets, but not vice-versa.

It’s a very bad precedent to set. What if one day there is something really big that could be damaging to share? If you’ve got into the habit of “confessing” to your wife, then if one time you decline to it will be a red flag. Either of you might find yourself in this situation one day.

 

[rcwitness]

Totally agree, especially if it’s a one way communication - ie.she get’s his dirty secrets, but not vice-versa.

Is that how you see it? A wife asking because she takes pleasure in knowing what her husband is remorseful about???

Is this also how you perceive your priest hearing your confession? Does he get your dirty secrets for some sort of advantage?

Maybe it’s not pleasant for the spouse who is asking. Maybe they suffer a lot of hardship. Just maybe this has to do with the family!

 

[pnewton]

The question asked is one that should not be asked, as it is really a temptation to sin, no so much by lying, but if the answer is awkward, to sin by receiving in a state of mortal sin next time. That is the real problem with asking such a question.

However, I understand why the wife might have asked. Either she felt some insecurities over something, maybe she does know more than we see in this thread, or she has some fear that she cannot overcome.

Perhaps a partial answer would be in order, assurance that the reason had nothing to do with her, there is no affair, or no other woman, for example. If it is truly not something the wife needs to know, and she does have a right to know some things, then at least that might be addressed.

 

[rcwitness]

Perhaps a partial answer would be in order, assurance that the reason had nothing to do with her, there is no affair, or no other woman, for example. If it is truly not something the wife needs to know, and she does have a right to know some things, then at least that might be addressed.

I agree the depth of the answer directly relates to the depth it affect the spouse. But that’s where I think some Catholics are under estimating the depth that sin penetrates into your spouse. There is actually a very high likelihood that pain, sorrow, or some damage or hardship has, is, or will be experienced related to one spouse committing an act which they know goes against Christ! Which brings up Sacramental grace! The grace of Marriage in the Lord is able to draw on the Love of Jesus to cause shame and judgment to vanish.

The depth that you see your spouses true self and love them, is the depth that you experience God’s grace.

For this reason, it is the “secret” party who does not trust in the grace of God in their spouse. We don’t have to trust that our spouse would never commit a mortal sin to love them. And we don’t have to feel ashamed of sin which we have true remorse for!

This is what the spouse who asked in good faith wants to hear; that remorse is sincere, and this sin will be forgiven, and reparation done. A spouse like that is one with the heart of Mary.

 

[tafan2]

I am talking about the general discussion at hand: if a person does not go to communion, should the spouse ask them why?

My contention, and it has been nothing but reenforced by those who adamantly content the answer is yes, is that it is showing a lack of trust by asking.

 

[rcwitness]

Trust in what?

 

[tafan2]

Yes, that was my initial point, the orecedent is horrible. The orecedent could very possibly tempt one’s spouse to commit a mortal sin in the future. “I cannot tell my wife why, I know she will ask, maybe I should just receive.”

 

[tafan2]

Again, deliberately obtuse. Tom commit a serious sin, for whatever reason Tom decides he cannot or do not want to share that with their spouse. In the scenario being discussed, that part is a given. Tom’s wife then asks why they did not receive. That is showing a lack of of trust in the Tom’s decision to keep his sin private.

 

[rcwitness]

Why cant he tell his wife? Shame? That is the sin, regardless of whether a spouse asks or not.

 

[rcwitness]

How do you know this sin has not caused or been the result of personal damage to the Family?

 

[pnewton]

Shame? That is the sin, regardless of whether a spouse asks or not.

Shame is a sin? I do not think so. Shame is a feeling, and feelings are not a matter of deliberate choice. I would think shame, as a feeling from guilt, might be a consequence of sin. In any case, it is an understandable one, just as a wife’s feelings of insecurity should be understandable.

I think too much disagreement here is from the ideal of what needs to happen, the honesty of marriage versus the privacy of the soul. People are not ideals and the question is worthy of a more realistic response. No answer that leaves the wife to mind her own business will be conducive to the marriage relationship. She is, in a reality as deep as the real presence of Christ, on flesh with her husband.

The relationship is that of Christ to the Church. If we keep no secrets with Christ, we should keep none with the spouse. I know we do, as we are all human, but this cannot be defended by some recourse to canon law, seal of confession, or traditional customs in a way that nullifies the teaching of St. Paul.

 

[rcwitness]

You are right. It is a feeling that comes from doing something wrong. It is pride overwhelmed by shame which allows the wrongful behavior to be repressed from those it has affected, or is affecting, or will affect in the future.

Sin can have many various affects on those close to us. Some directly and others indirectly.

 

[rcwitness]

Yes, and the answer cannot be a written law. It has various issues which greatly change the manner of response.

Nevertheless, I strongly believe the spouse has a general right to ask, which can be done in good faith, but also that the response does not have a general rule, other than honoring the question with good faith in return, fitting to the reason for refraining from His Eucharist.

 

[tafan2]

Feeling shameful is a sin? No it’s not. Shame can be a good thing, it can helps us recognize out guilt. I no lots of modern day psyco-babble folks talk about shame being bad for you. I have never once seen where the church says it’s a sin.

As to why he doesn’t tell her, asked or not? It doesn’t matter to my point. My point is he decided not to, if his spouse trusts him, she will respect that.

 

[rcwitness]

Being ashamed to confess sin that affects another person is wrong.

If we are not ashamed to tell the priest and Jesus our trespass, and so give Jesus our shame and no longer bear it, then why do we not make amends with the person who may have affected?

If it hasn’t affected the spouse at all, then the spouse could still be a minister of comfort to the one who is unable to enjoy Communion in good faith.