www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Denial of Communion

Well, okay, I don't have any problem with a discussion about the differences in the way the Sacraments are administered in different traditions.

However, my point is that this story, as I read it, has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not it's proper to give the Eucharist to babies or small children. It has to do with a priest who did not -- as is stated in the story itself --properly follow the Church's guidelines about giving the Sacraments to the disabled.

Yet *all* the comments which followed all deal with the former rather than the latter. And, well, call me overly defensive, but to describe the R.C.'s longstanding practice as just "a western hang-up," I just gotta step in and say something in my beloved Rite's defense! I mean, how would you feel if I described something in your tradition as "an Eastern hang-up"?

Argh Diak - I'm blushing like mad.

Actually it was Sharon who set me off on this a long while back - when she spoke of her little one's Baptism and described this little one full of Mama's milk and then full of Jesus and then, if I remember correctly, he fell asleep

Someone else also [ possibly Sharon again - it sounds like her ] commented that we give children Physical food for their very physical bodies so why should they not have spiritual food also and this really hit home.

Our handicapped kiddies and adults are treated as real people and do appreciate more , I suspect, than we give them credit for. I do know the Sacrament of Reconciliation is altered for them - but I don't know the details.

Yes our Children are prepared for their first Holy Communion - and indeed most of them are now Confirmed before they are Communed [ we are still in a catching up process there ] First Confession may be as long as 1 year before Communion , but it should be closer soon - as proposed at present, it will be Confirmation, First Confession and First Holy Communion within one Academic year.

It would be nice to see all three Sacraments of Initiation given as babies are Baptised - but being realistic I think that is a long way off - after all we do it for Aduilts entering the Church - so why not ?

Another point I would like to make here - yes I am Latin and I enjoy being here [ well most of the time ] and I think these frank exchanges of views are good for all of us - we learn about each other and argue our standpoints. The amazing thing is that we never know how something we have said about a subject affects another person and causes them to think , and just maybe ,change their point of view.

Sorry about the length of this - thanks for putting up with it and hopefully reading it

Anhelyna

Theist Gal

<<"an Eastern hang-up"? >>

Oh it's been done - plenty of times I assure you, and then they just laugh and then agree to differ.

Anhelyna

Oh ... okay ... I agree to differ ... if y'all do too!

How can anyone "understand" the Most Holy Eucharist?

I know a lot of adults and teens who reached the "age of reason" and later left the Church.

Joe - you are so right.

I certainly don't - I find It Awesome.

And I will never understand

I think there's a misunderstanding here - obviously no one ever completely "understands" the Holy Eucharist. The object of the catechesis is simply to make sure the child understands that she is about to receive something very special - not just a piece of bread and a sip of wine, but Jesus Christ Himself in a very special way.

(And as I recall from my own pre-First Communion preparations, it's also to make sure the child doesn't do anything to make S'ter blow her top during Mass! )

TG,

My wife and I became godparents for our friend's son. At 8yrs old he just received Confirmation prior to receiving his first Communion. Eventually, the Latin Catholic diocese here is intending to merge all three initiation sacraments as practiced in the Eastern (and ancient) churches.

Joe

Hmm -- are they just doing this on their own or have they received permission to do so from their Bishop? If the latter, that's great, but if they're just making up their own rules, well, I would be a little concerned.

By the way, I don't mean to sound so cranky today, but my boss has been forcing Starbucks(tm) down my throat all day and I'm a little nnnneerrrrvoouuusss!!

TG,

See my earlier thread on this:

https://www.byzcath.org/cgibin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=7;t=000685

Cantor Joe Thur

QUAM SINGULARI: Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Discipline of the Sacraments on First Communion (August 8, 1910).

This decree was written to counter the growing 'abuse' of postponing First Communion in the Latin Church until the age of maturity, not the age of reason.

http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDWFIRST.htm

A close reading will show that infant communion was a practice of the Latin Church and that Trent had no intentions of ridding of it, but instead, tried to remedy a mandatory minimum age to receive it since it became a custom to postpone it. Unfortunately, the remedy for some became the norm for all. Trying to understand what the age of reason is is as difficult in trying to understand what the Eucharist is.

Today, a study of returning to earlier customs (infant communion) is taking place in the Latin Catholic Church. My son has been communicating at the Latin parochial school since kindergarten, and this has only helped educate fellow Latins with the reality of where they may be headed.

Joe

Hi, Joe - -

I just looked up the source of the link you provided, and was disturbed to see that the Administrator of the "Pax et Veritas" site makes the following statement:

This would seem to disqualify him as a source of valid, official information about the Catholic Church. In my humble opinion.

TG,

I changed it to another link. The text, QUAM SINGULARI, is still the same no matter who links to it. Don't know what the pax et veritas site is about. Sorry.

John Cardinal Wright once wrote about the decree:

"The Decree Quam Singulari, in treating the age at which children are to be initiated into their post-baptismal sacramental life, had to face (as had a decree on frequent Communion by the Sacred Congregation of the Council, five years before) certain doctrinal and ascetical errors that had become deeply rooted in Catholic life at the opening of the century, at least in some parts of the world. One of these was the pretense that a greater discretion is required for first Communion than for first Confession. This, like most of the other errors, was rooted in Jansenism: for example, one was the idea that to receive first Holy Communion requires a nearly complete knowledge of the Articles of Faith and, therefore, an extraordinary preparation. In effect, this means deferring first Communion for the riper age of 12, 14 or even older."

He also states:

"Most moving, in a day which thinks of itself as having discovered the rights of parents and the wholesome claims of personalism, is the contention of the 1910 decree that the formal admission of the child to first Communion rests with its parents, or the one taking their place, and with its confessor or spiritual director. The decree presupposes that these will act together and, when they agree on the matter, no one may interfere. Where the parents are negligent or indifferent, or opposed to their child's first Communion, the father-confessor (note carefully that he is assumed to be already the child's confidant) can take on the entire responsibility."

The entire document can be read here:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...c_con_cclergy_doc_07121980_fconf_en.html


Joe

Dear Joe,

They would need some Vatican permission to do that

Here is the Canon Law on the subject.

The bishop could not do this on his own authority, but would require a Papal dispensation from Canon Law.

-Brendan (no, not that Brendan, the other Brendan)

Brendan
Thanks for that quote - it was just what I needed

Going back to the very first post on this thread - the child that was deinied Communion

Now if this had been applied with sensitivity [ as it is undoubtedly done in some places] this whole stramash would never have happened.

As to the re-ordering of the Sacraments of Initiation to which Joe referred - I am a leeeeeeeetle hazy as to his meaning of this.

I can't see the RC Church at present agreeing to infants receiving all the Sacraments togther at their Baptism but there certainly is a movement [ here in the UK and in some other areas I understand] for children to receive Confirmation much younger [ it used to be about 12 years of age] Here in our Archdiocese we are certainly moving to Confirmation, First Confession then First Holy Communion in one academic year [ sort of October/November (Confirmation), then Lent ( Confession), with First Communion during the same Easter Period ] We seem to be thinking of our 8yr olds though the 'catch up' stages are still ongoing.

Maybe one day it will all become clear

Anhelyna