www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Communion for children of BC in RC churches

I recently moved to a new area and am attending an RC church. We have no BC church in our area. I have not officially joined as yet. My youngest daughter (6 yrs old) has not taken 1st confession. She has been asking to take communion. She has been taking communion since birth at our previous BC church. Is it permitted for BC children to receive communion in an RC church?

Yes, it's OK. Since in the RC children generally begin receiving the Eucharist around age 7, a six-year-old should not be an issue at all. With much younger children, it is certainly advisable to talk to the pastor beforehand. In fact, you should probably do so in any case, both to make sure he is aware of the situation, and just to introduce yourself.

-- Ed

Thanks for the information Ed. I will talk to the priest and see how it goes!! Tari

Dear TLK,

As an Orthodox Christian I ask, what are all of the other precious RC children that have not reached the "age of reason" to do?

Matthew 19
13 Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them.
14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
15 And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence.

There is a direct correlation between liturgical consistent practices and theological consistency expressed in the fullness of the truth and established in the Orthodox Church which God's right hand has planted. Does truth change and how in the world can the Roman Catholic Church age of reason notion be accepted by any reasonable mind, particularly when in Orthodox theology the mind is considered lower and the heart is expressed by the Orthodox fathers as the seat of the soul and divine knowledge?

The hearing the notion articulated that RC practices and Orthodoxy as being very compatible can be disturbing at times.

Having reached the age of reason, could someone please
explain to me the reasoning why a child would be denied having the precious body and blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ given to them?

It seems quite wrong and exceedingly beyond terrible to me.

Waiting patiently for any somewhat reasonable response, if there is one.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

Hi,

The discipline of our Church puts them in an "Eucharistic fast", not as in not taking food before the Eucharist, but rather as in not receiving the Eucharist for disciplinary reasons.


I do not think diversity in this regard should make one opinion better than the other. These are just different ways to do things.

No, having reached the age of reason, all RC children are strongly encouraged to approach the altar.

However, the method used to discern whether a child has reached the age of reason can be a long formation process.

In our parish, which is very Eastern-friendly (hey, we are even listed as a bi-ritual parish, Latin and Maronite), our Pastor has made exceptions to this rule that border in the "wild":

He once was told by a very young girl: 'You are prejudicious'.

Surprised by the accusation, Fr. Bill asked the girl 'Why do you think so?'

'Because you give the Body of Christ to many people, but you do not give me any', was the answer.

The girl received Holy Communion for the first time the following weekend. 'What else is there to understand about the Eucharist?' says Fr. Bill whenever he tells the story.

I understand how you feel, and I actually agree with you. It is wrong to spiritually starve our children for the first 7-8 years. I see no reason to do so. The Eucharist is effective not because of what we think about it, but because what, or better yet, who the Eucharist objectively is.

I'd be more than happy if the Latin Church were to return the the ancient practice of full initiation for infants, but meanwhile, I will follow my Church's discipline.

Obedience is objectively a good thing as well.

My daugther Cristina received First Holy Communion two weeks ago. The Sunday before that, as we walked to receive, Holy Communion myself, a blessing all of my three children, I turned back and told her: "Your fast is over, hijita, this is the last time you will have to do this. From now on, you will be receiving a blessing no more, but the Blessed One Himself". Her eyes brightened with joy, mine with joyful tears.

Shalom,
Memo.

Dear Memo,

I suppose the disciplinary reasons for denying a child in the fold are instituted for catechesis purposes while the child is attaining the age of reason, and when they are more learned at the ripe age of seven or so they are then permitted to partake in the divine?

John 21:16
He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

Obedience to the departure from Orthodox Patrimony is not objective but subjective and not good for anyone, in my opinion.

Your Quote "I do not think diversity in this regard should make one opinion better than the other. These are just different ways to do things."

The above statement and your quote, I don't think is accurate because relative to partaking of the body and blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ the Orthodox tradition does not deny the Eucharist to a child until they have reached the age of reason. The Latin practice does not allow a child to receive the body and blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ until they have reached the Latin idea of an age of reason. As such they are not just different ways to do things for in the correct teachings of the Orthodox Church it is appropriate for a child to receive the body and blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ irrespective of age. In the Latin practice the Orthodox tradition has been replaced with the age of reason which precludes children from receiving the Eucharist, the same things are not being done when the child is denied the Eucharist.

Thank you for response, it was good to read of your daughter Cristina's First Holy Communion reception.

In Christ,

Matthew

As a Roman Catholic, with an eastern heart, I long for my 3 year old daughter to be able to receive Holy Eucharist. I would gladly forego the white dress and veil celebration at a later age for the wonderful privilege of Heavenly Food she would be receiving now, if I had that option.

When did this change come about in the Roman Catholic Church?

Also, many years ago, I was a Baptist. In their practice, one must reach the age of reason and declare a belief in Jesus as Savior prior to Baptism, which commonly happens at age 7 or 8 or even much older.

How does the RC age of reason differ from this protestant idea? RCs baptize infants, but do not chrismate or commune them. What is the historical reason for the development of this RC tradition?

Wondering, and hoping for revitalization of the ancient tradition, Tammy

Hi,

Yes.

Of course, however a proper catechetical formation is also part of that feeding responsibility that the Church has for all her children, not just the young ones.

The current Latin discipline is not denying the sacraments, it is just specifying when and how.


And this line of thought is, in my opinion, what has our Ecumenical dialogue in limbo.

The Latin discipline is not a departure from anything. It is a legitimate development from a fully Sui-Iuris Church with Apostolic Tradition.

If your Sui-Iuris Church developed a discipline different than ours and/or if this discipline was developed before or after ours, that doesn't make your discipline any better or any worse than ours. They are just different.

Again, nobody is being denied, the Church is just regulating about when and how. If there is pressing need, or danger of death, any child can receive the Eucharist.

The discipline about the reception of the sacraments is just that, discipline, and each Church has the right to regulate in this regard.

Let me insist that I personally agree with the Eastern practice, but not that is not enough to make me think the Latin practice is inherently wrong, or incorrect.

Shalom,
Memo

Dear Memo,

I disagree with your reasoning, because a Roman Catholic child is not allowed to receive the Eucharist under normal circumstance save anticipated or lurking death the child is being denied the Eucharist from birth until the "age of reason", because it is being withheld from reception for some period of disciplinary time. I'm often in need of disciplinary action and even so I'm not denied the Eucharist in the Orthodox Church even in a much less than innocent state. With regards to your assertion that "nobody is being denied" it is obvious that if the child is prevented from receiving the Eucharist the child is being denied the Eucharist, irrespective of your conclusion and understanding. To claim otherwise is blatantly false.

Even Saint Augustine believed that the traditional practice of the reception of communion by children was a necessity for children.

I do believe that the Latin practice is inherently wrong and quite incorrect. Perhaps my perspective is limited by my beliefs.

I'm so glad to hear that you personally agree with the eastern practice while being subjected to and embracing a different practice. Surely this sort of reasoning could lead one to say that a child is not being denied the Eucharist when they are. As such I think that at this time in our age of reasoning we differ, and it is best that I quit scratching my head.

Dear Tammy,

Actually from what I've read, in the west the withholding of the Eucharist was implemented by the order of Charlemagne and conveyed through the Council of Tours in the year 813, it was traditional for children to receive the Eucharist and took some time for the practice to be stopped in the west.

In the Fourth Lateran Council 1215 and the subsequent Council of Trent 1545-1563 the notion of withholding the Eucharist until the age of reason was solidified.

On a personal note, I'm not capable of believing that denying a child the Eucharist under any circumstances can possibly be acceptable and correct. I would think that it might be a rather troubling development for those parents who willingly subject themselves to it. Conclusion, perhaps if enough parents spoke up in large support of returning to the ancient practice sadly they wouldn't get anywhere. And on that conclusion I would love to be proven blatantly wrong.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

Dear Memo,

I should have written (I'm not so glad to hear) it was a typo error and should not be intended to be understood otherwise. Icaught it after I posted.

Sorry.

Matthew

Just a late entry....

A Byzantine Catholic child, who, having been fully initiated via the Mysteries of Baptism, Chrismation and Eucharist, is no different than any other Catholic in terms of his or her right to fully participate in the Eucharistic celebration of any Catholic Church - unless he or she is in a state of grave sin or an apostate. (This is not an issue for most kids between the age of birth and six or seven years.)

Since it's not the practice in the Roman Catholic Church to communicate kids this young, it is a courtesy to speak with the celebrant beforehand, and to take care to end up in his communion line. We've done this many times in our travels, and rarely had a problem except with a couple of "old line" Byzantine priests. Once or twice going back to a church, I or my husband have had to quietly remind the priest "He receives." (I don't think most priests in BIG RC churches really have a chance to register who is standing in front of them if they are communicating 300 people - he sees a toddler and automatically starts to bless.) If folks question it, it's an eminently teachable opportunity. We haven't had a lot of problems

Cheers,

Sharon
(Mom of three, two of whom are now old enough to render the issue moot)

To understand the history of why, in the West, children do not partake of communion, we must delve a bit into the question of confirmation in the West.

We must remember, in the East, children are chrismated when they are baptized. This gives them full rights to the sacraments.

In the West, this practice was suspended, for several reasons: they kept it for Bishops to do confirmation; but more importantly, at stages of mass conversion of nations, baptism was performed by confirmation was not given in order to guarantee catechesis.

This became, then, the tradition in the West.

For centuries, the traditional order of confirmation before first communion held.

Then, Pope St Pius X, seeing the ancient tradition of children partaking of communion, did the unusual move of putting first communion before confirmation.

This is a relatively recent innovation, and I consider it as a modern dispensation, and one which I hope will end with early (infant) confirmation of Roman Catholic children.

If this situation is corrected, wouldn't this also be a grand opportunity for unity in belief, east and west? It would be a teaching moment. Let us all beg God for this gift.

Praising his mercies to us all, Tammy

Dear Tammy,

My wife is partially with you. She wishes our prodigal son who refuses Confirmation could have been confirmed as an infant. Our 2 daughters had no problems with being confirmed as teens.

As far as the Latin church changing its Confirmation and First Communion practices.
There is way too small a minority of both clergy and laity who even think about it. Sorry, that's the reality.

When in Rome, do as the Romans. And when in the East, embrace the Eastern traditions.

A nice thing about our Church is that you may make use of the traditions that strengthen your faith and spirituality by attending an Eastern Church or Latin Church.

God bless,

Paul

Paul,

Actually, more I study, the more I come across those in the West realizing that the order of the sacraments have been messed up and should be restored back to the original order.

This has also come with an increase in Roman priests giving confirmation.

I have read some discussions on the issue, and see that this might be slow, but is that surprising? That more are aware of the problem is a start. It was the same kind of start which got early communion for children, when they began to realize children used to partake of communion.