www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Eastern Catholics and frequency of Communion

In the Latin Rite, it very much encouraged that people receive the Eucharist as often as possible, with the ideal being every day. I've noticed that the closest Byzantine Rite parish to me celebrates the Divine Liturgy on Sundays only.

Is this pretty much the norm? If other parishes might have more frequent Liturgies how often does an average Eastern Catholic receive the Eucharist?

As an easterner, I think Saturdays, Sundays, and Holy Days would be the norm for me. If my memory is correct, frequent communion was not the norm for nearly 2,000 years in the Latin Church until Pius X. And if there is a drawback to frequent communion, it would seem to me that the familiarity has led to wide-spread contempt.

For us it is the same as when we were Orthodox: weekly, though more during Lent with Presanctified Liturgy.

Слава Ісусу Христу!

desertman,
That is an excellent question in which the Liturgy of Presanctified Gifts must play a part, with Saint Basil another. Let us get our Lenten prayer books down from the shelves.

Please remember that daily Communion is the ideal in both East and West. On this, the Churches of East and West are in agreement.

The question that now arises is: what are the conditions for being worthy to receive Communion daily?

Until c. 1907, in the West, one's confessor was the judge of whether one was worthy to receive Communion daily or not. There were a few places were people were encouraged to receive daily, but the contrary was the norm.

The result was that, in practice, only priests and some exemplary religious and laypeople actually communed daily. Most people received only a few times a year. It was like the situation in the Eastern Churches today. Sometimes, people were even counseled to give up marital relations for 3 days before receiving Communion.

Then, in the first decade of the 20th century, Pope St. Pius X in a series of decrees encouraged people to receive daily, so long as they were not in the state of mortal sin and were in the state of grace, and had the correct intention. However, he did not relax the traditional Eucharistic fast from midnight until the reception of Communion. While Pope St. Pius X wanted people to receive Holy Communion daily, he did not want to thereby relax the ascetical preparation necessary. His love for the Blessed Sacrament was equaled by his horror of impiety and sacrilege.

The first cracks appeared in the 1940's, when dispensations from the Eucharistic fast began to increase. In two decrees in 1953 and 1957, Pope Pius XII decreased the Eucharistic fast to 3 hours from food and 1 hour from beverages, while water can be taken anytime.

With this, a flood was opened, and many bishops began asking for more relaxations. In 1964, Pope Paul VI finally decreased the Eucharistic fast to 1 hour before Communion -- which, given the average length of the Mass, might mean that one can continue eating until 15 minutes before the start of the Mass on a Sunday. As many loyal Roman Catholics have pointed out, this is no fast at all.

I think that in this as in many matters, our Eastern Catholic and Orthodox brethren can learn from the experience of the Roman Catholic Church on what NOT to do.


Anyway... one thing that I have noticed is that in traditional Roman Catholic piety, daily, not just Sunday, Mass and Holy Communion are considered sine qua non for holiness. I remember one of my spiritual directors -- a priest of the old school -- thundering that we cannot expect to survive without sinning if we received Communion only from Sunday to Sunday. In countless books published prior to the 1960's, daily communion is considered as a necessity of the devout life. Indeed, some books counseled people that if they have no time to attend daily Mass, they should at least try to receive Holy Communion (prior to the 1950's, it was common for Holy Communion to be distributed outside of Mass, and it was rare for Communion to be distributed during High and Solemn High Mass. It was also common for a priest to distribute communion at the altar rail, independently of a Mass being said at the altar. I own several books of rubrics and there are copious directions on how this is to be done)

Now, in retrospect, if there is this attitude that one MUST receive Communion DAILY in order to be holy, then sooner or later, there will be a clamor for the ascetical preparation once considered necessary for Communion to be also relaxed. After all, not all workers can fast from midnight until Communion-time! And, indeed, this is what has happened in the Roman Catholic Church. And the result is horrible to see.

Far from the flowering of Eucharistic piety, of holiness and of social renewal that Pope St. Pius X had hoped will come from daily communion, what we now see is a general disregard for the Eucharist. Coupled with the nearly non-existent Eucharistic fast and the collapse of traditional piety since the 1960's, it seems that what we now have in many Roman Catholic churches is not so much daily communion as routine sacrilege.

So, do our Eastern brethren wish the same to happen to them?

I personally think that the Eastern liturgical and spiritual tradition is perfect as it is, and there is nothing wrong with every-Sunday communion. Indeed, I am of the belief that just as one devout Communion is more beneficial than ten cold or lukewarm ones, so an Eastern Christian who receives communion every Sunday after having practiced the necessary preparation and recited the prescribed canons and prayers, benefits more from his communion than a Roman Catholic who receives every day of the week after fasting very little and saying but a few prayers.

Furthermore, I am of the belief that regular weekday attendance in Orthros or Vespers is as spiritually beneficial for an Eastern Christian as daily Mass attendance is for a Roman Catholic. No need to imitate the Latins and institute a daily "Low Divine Liturgy"! Daily Orthros and Vespers "extend" the graces of the Sunday Divine Liturgy across the week and those Eastern Christians who attend these and devoutly attend and receive at the Sunday Divine Liturgy are availing themselves of the same graces as Roman Catholics who have the daily Mass (but no experience at all of the Office).

Just my musings...

Thank you, AsianPilgrim, for your post I enjoyed reading it and was most edified by it. I'm quite happy that some Catholics see the extreme relaxation (better to say de facto elimination) of the Eucharistic Fast in the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church as a very great impoverishment. Speaking as an outsider, I also see the routine communion hordes of Catholics who have not darkened the door of a Confessional in months (or, truth to tell, even years) as a very great sacrilege. One thing I can say for the Russian Orthodox Church: I have an accurate foreknowledge of how many communicants there will be at my Liturgies based upon who has gone to Confession.

Fr David Straut

I think that it would be great to receive the Most Pure Body of our Lord every day, but one must ask oneself these questions:

1. Did I confess my sins to my Spiritual Father yesterday at Vespers, or this morning at Matins, and am I in as close to a sinless state as possible?

2. Did I attend Vespers and Matins prior to Liturgy?

3. Did I fast from all food and water after Vespers?

4. Did I meet my obligation with Pre-Communion Preparatory Prayers?

5. Did I refrain from sexual congress with my spouse last night?

One must remember, that what we receive is the Most Pure Blood and Body of our Lord, and that the chalice is to be approached with fear and trembling, lest we be consumed for our sinfulness.
All too often, the Gifts are approached with a certain nonchalance that I find most troubling.

Alexandr

Is it possible that Jansenism has taken refuge in parts (mostly in the northern climes) of the Christian East?

Most of us in Communion with Rome have no desire to see a return to regarding annual Communion as the height of Eucharistic devotion - and I speak from experience.

Insisting that one should make a sacramental Confession every time one wishes to receive Holy Communion is well justified if one is to approach the Holy Mysteries once a year. If one is to do so on a much more frequent basis, such a "requirement" (which has no Scriptural or Patristic basis) could easily lead to "scrupulosity".

Fast from all food and water after Vespers? Excuse me? Who came up with this one? When I was a student at Saint Vladimir's the practice was (and I believe still is) that supper followed either Vespers or Vigil - and that people would come to Confession either before or after supper.

It is well to offer the Metalepsis (the Preparatory Prayers before Holy Communion); the practice should certainly be encouraged. But turning it into an "obligation" can also lead to abuses.

I won't even discuss the matter of sexual congress with one's lawful wedded spouse!

I will, however, remind anyone who cares to read this that the Fathers teach that if we are so unworthy to receive Holy Communion frequently, then we are at least equally unworthy to receive Holy Communion annually. All too often, these annual communicants regard this as an "obligation" of parish membership, or something like that, to be gotten out of the way each year with a huge sigh of relief that one need not bother for another 12 months. What sort of approach is that?

The flip side of the coin can be found among certain Orthodox who never go to Confession at all - they see no reason why they should, or find the idea strange, or whatever - and who nevertheless receive their "annual Communion" with a similarly troubling nonchalance. I prefer not to give specific examples, because that would not be very kind of me, but such examples can be given only too easily.

Yes, we are sinful. And Holy Communion is given us "unto the remission of sins". Those words do mean something.

Fr. Serge

Fr. David,

I have witnessed this phenomena in my grandfather's church in Transcarpathia. I have attended church four times during the Pentecost season and no one came forward to recieve the Eucharist. These village churches were Greek Catholic until 1945. Since then, they are part of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church- Moscow Patriarchate. Is this common across all Orthodox jurisdictions or is this something only associated with the Moscovite Church tradition? I have attended Orthodox Church services in Eastern Slovakia and communicants have come forward and have indeed recieved the holy Eucharist.

Ung

Dear Ung,

I am puzzled by your assumption that just because regular Confession is expected before regular Holy Communion that there will be no communicants at Liturgy. I cannot identify with your experience in Ukraine. I personally have only served perhaps three Liturgies in my 22 years as a priest where I have had no lay communicants at all. Orthodox priests should be preaching and teaching frequent Confession and Communion. (I personally do not feel that there needs to be an absolute one-on-one correspondence between Confession and Communion. But knowing myself as I do, I realise that frequent Confession is important for regular Communion.)

Again I ask: Does it not trouble Catholics that there are so many Communions at each Mass or Liturgy by those who have not been to Confession for who knows how long?

Fr David

Fr.,

I don't condone frequent reception of the Eucharist without proper preparation and fasting. My puzzlement concerning the UOC-MP churches is that on such holy days such as the Feast of Pentecost, it appears that the faithful do not have the opportunity to confess. Without the sacrement of Reconciliation, recieving the holy Eucharist is not possible in these Moscow Patriarchial parishes.

Maybe this situation exists because the rural parishes have one priest serving multiple churches. My grandfather's village church has Sunday services once every three weeks.

Ung

This Catholic is bothered by it. Something is wrong when the Communion line has everyone in it and no one in the confession line. Many Catholics I know look and see how much confession is going on at a parish before they decide to make it their parish.

Many of the Eastern rite Catholics commute so they go to confession at the local Latin Rite parish. Many of the Eastern Churches will have a set time for confession that is almost impossible to get to. The Melkite priest I go to will do it during Liturgy, Vespers, or anytime you need it.

It definitely troubles this (Roman) Catholic, and I know it troubles many other Catholics as well. Our parish priest has since his arrival emphasized the importance of regular confession, and I wish all priests would do so. I find it scandalous to see parishes with 30 minutes allotted to confession each week, but literally thousands of people communing each Sunday. Clearly something is amiss.

I do not think, however, that daily communion is a cause of the decrease in the overall reverence for the Eucharist. In fact, my own experience is the exact opposite: those I know who commune daily are the most reverent towards the Eucharist and go to confession regularly as well (at least monthly, if not weekly).

I do think the hour "fast" is part of the problem. Without a true fast, it becomes the case that anyone seen as not going forward for communion is assumed to be not in the state of grace. For some, this causes an embarrassment that pushes them to go forward unworthily. I think if there were at least a three hour fast before Mass, then you would not have the phenomenon of every single person going forward to receive, which would make it easier for those not prepared to remain behind.

My mother was raised Roman Catholic. We went to mass together once while I was in highschool looking into the Church. I had to tell her that she should NOT go up to receive communion because she was no longer Catholic and hadn't been to confession in decades. Embarrassment was part of her reasoning. While she did want to go to communion for it's own sake she also felt that by not going people would be looking at her and wondering what awful sin she committed that she wasn't going up to receive!

What is "regular confession" to Roman Catholics? I thought that they were required only to formally confess mortal sins. I thought the point was to not to repeat them.

And by the way, being Orthodox, I've never heard of the preparatory rules about church attendance prior to every Communion, that Confession was required before every Communion, or even that the full Pre-Communion Canon was to be recited.

Then again, the Orthodox world is huge, so maybe other faithful have gotten different pastoral instructions. It seems that frequent Communion would be possible in some places more than others, if that's the case.