Communion W/out Confession

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' date='25 May 2010 - 12:30 AM' timestamp='1274761824' post='2117070']
That's my understanding. Extraordinary circumstances. Although I've always been confused as to what that might be. I'm thinking maybe something like in the villages in Africa, where Mass in only celebrated once or twice a year and one might not be able to confess before Mass (lots of confessions too, I'd imagine).
[/quote]

As far as I can tell, the "grave reason" has traditionally been understood to imply danger of scandal, which makes sense to me. For instance, a priest who consecrates the bread and wine could perhaps cause scandal by abstaining from the Eucharist in front of the congregation. A Catholic spouse-to-be could perhaps cause scandal by abstaining from the Eucharist within the context of the wedding. There are unending examples. The point is to not treat the sacrifice of our Lord lightly; if the situation seems "grave" (I don't think this should strictly be taken as "in danger of death"), make a perfect act of contrition and resolve to go to confession as soon as possible.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='25 May 2010 - 10:20 PM' timestamp='1274836834' post='2117829']
That priest was wrong if we are talking about mortal sin in this situation. Unless there is a [i]grave[/i] reason, then it is incredibly inappropriate to receive Communion before sacramental Confession if one has committed a mortal sin.
[/quote]

Isn't that the big "if?" In the context of addictive behavior, sins of grave matter are not mortal because the addiction deprives a person of their free will.

[quote name='fides' Jack' date='25 May 2010 - 10:35 PM' timestamp='1274837712' post='2117845']
Is this seriously an issue that is unclear? I'm very sorry if I'm being rude, but it is a greater sin - a sin a sacrilege - to receive Holy Communion unworthily. This is a matter that every Catholic should understand perfectly.[/quote]

The question isn't about receiving Communion unworthily -- it's about defining the state of being worthy.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='MissScripture' date='26 May 2010 - 12:54 AM' timestamp='1274846043' post='2118008']
And I think Rexi is right, because I remember a priest once telling me that we're lucky as Catholics, because we only need an imperfect contrition because we have confession. Any other Christian needs a perfect contrition.
[/quote]

Good thing God can give the grace of perfect contrition to Protestants too

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' date='27 May 2010 - 07:55 PM' timestamp='1275008133' post='2119458']
Good thing God can give the grace of perfect contrition to Protestants too
[/quote]

Being Protestant is a grave sin [i]per se[/i].

[fides' Jack]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' date='27 May 2010 - 07:52 PM' timestamp='1275007923' post='2119455']
Isn't that the big "if?" In the context of addictive behavior, sins of grave matter are not mortal because the addiction deprives a person of their free will.



The question isn't about receiving Communion unworthily -- it's about defining the state of being worthy.
[/quote]


Woah - that is something we absolutely cannot do - which is judge the state of another's soul. Good thing we're just talking about hypothetical situations here. Still, you can't say for sure that any addiction deprives a person of their free will, and thereby makes any sin venial rather than mortal. That is something that is strictly between the sinner and God. There are many different degrees of addiction, and at any moment what you say might be true or untrue.

Fortunately for us, the Church has already defined the state of being worthy, and each person must use the Church's definition to determine whether or not they are actually "worthy" to receive. No other person can make that determination for them, in normal circumstances, anyway.

[fides' Jack]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='27 May 2010 - 08:11 PM' timestamp='1275009102' post='2119462']
Being Protestant is a grave sin [i]per se[/i].
[/quote]

What exactly do you mean by that? Being Protestant is not in itself a sin.

[Catholic Fox]

[quote name='fides' Jack' date='27 May 2010 - 11:06 PM' timestamp='1275019601' post='2119553']
What exactly do you mean by that? Being Protestant is not in itself a sin.
[/quote]

It involves denying what the Church teaches is true, and thus being a heretic, which is a sin.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='fides' Jack' date='27 May 2010 - 11:06 PM' timestamp='1275019601' post='2119553']
What exactly do you mean by that? Being Protestant is not in itself a sin.
[/quote]

Yes, it is. Denying the Catholic Church is a grave sin in and of itself.

[MissScripture]

[quote name='fides' Jack' date='28 May 2010 - 12:04 AM' timestamp='1275019491' post='2119551']
Woah - that is something we absolutely cannot do - which is judge the state of another's soul. Good thing we're just talking about hypothetical situations here. Still, you can't say for sure that any addiction deprives a person of their free will, and thereby makes any sin venial rather than mortal. That is something that is strictly between the sinner and God. There are many different degrees of addiction, and at any moment what you say might be true or untrue.

Fortunately for us, the Church has already defined the state of being worthy, and each person must use the Church's definition to determine whether or not they are actually "worthy" to receive. No other person can make that determination for them, in normal circumstances, anyway.
[/quote]


And I would think that it would be better to err on the side of caution and not go if you're not sure, and then go to confession, later.

[fides' Jack]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='27 May 2010 - 11:24 PM' timestamp='1275020698' post='2119572']
Yes, it is. Denying the Catholic Church is a grave sin in and of itself.
[/quote]

Being a Protestant doesn't necessarily mean that you denied the Catholic Church.

[fides' Jack]

[quote name='Catholic Fox' date='27 May 2010 - 11:20 PM' timestamp='1275020435' post='2119570']
It involves denying what the Church teaches is true, and thus being a heretic, which is a sin.
[/quote]

Not always. Probably not even half the time. According to the Code of Canon Law, anyone who follows a heresy or schism in good faith does not incur the automatic excommunication, which means that the Church does not believe them to be guilty of grave sin.

Heresy is a sin. Being a heretic is not. "Being" anything, is not, in itself, a sin. It might mean that you committed a sin at one time, but the state of "being" a sinner is not sinful in itself. "Being" a hypocrite is not a sin. "Being" a murderer is not a sin. Murdering is a sin.

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' date='27 May 2010 - 08:52 PM' timestamp='1275007923' post='2119455']
Isn't that the big "if?" In the context of addictive behavior, sins of grave matter are not mortal because the addiction deprives a person of their free will.



The question isn't about receiving Communion unworthily -- it's about defining the state of being worthy.
[/quote]

I've wondered about habitual sins, habitual addictive behavior...and how much a person is responsible for their actions. I've always thought they were totally responsible, because by their own decisions and free will, they allowed themselves to become trapped into the sin in the first place...

personally, i wouldn't dare receive Our Lord if I had committed a mortal sin...i would definitely wait until after Confession..

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='fides' Jack' date='27 May 2010 - 11:50 PM' timestamp='1275022240' post='2119588']
Not always. Probably not even half the time. According to the Code of Canon Law, anyone who follows a heresy or schism in good faith does not incur the automatic excommunication, which means that the Church does not believe them to be guilty of grave sin.[/quote]

The Code of Canon Law doesn't explicitly state anything about those commit heresy in good faith. It merely states, "Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3." (Code of Canon Law, Can. 1364 §1)

[quote name='fides' Jack' date='27 May 2010 - 11:50 PM' timestamp='1275022240' post='2119588']
Heresy is a sin. Being a heretic is not. "Being" anything, is not, in itself, a sin. It might mean that you committed a sin at one time, but the state of "being" a sinner is not sinful in itself. "Being" a hypocrite is not a sin. "Being" a murderer is not a sin. Murdering is a sin.
[/quote]

Being a heretic means that one is committing heresy at the present time. If one repents of his heresy and returns to right belief, he is no longer a heretic. It, thus, follows that being a heretic is always a sin, either formal or material.

[Catholic Fox]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='28 May 2010 - 11:01 AM' timestamp='1275062463' post='2119715']




Being a heretic means that one is committing heresy at the present time. If one repents of his heresy and returns to right belief, he is no longer a heretic. It, thus, follows that being a heretic is always a sin, either formal or material.
[/quote]

Amen!

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='27 May 2010 - 10:11 PM' timestamp='1275009102' post='2119462']
Being Protestant is a grave sin [i]per se[/i].
[/quote]

This is also correct.

[quote name='fides' Jack' date='28 May 2010 - 01:04 AM' timestamp='1275019491' post='2119551']
Woah - that is something we absolutely cannot do - which is judge the state of another's soul. Good thing we're just talking about hypothetical situations here.[/quote]

Chill... I only repeated the advice given by a former confessor who is as orthodox a priest as you'll find. This stuff isn't intended for everyone to take as personal advice. We're just talking about general situations.

[quote name='fides' Jack' date='28 May 2010 - 01:04 AM' timestamp='1275019491' post='2119551']
Still, you can't say for sure that any addiction deprives a person of their free will, and thereby makes any sin venial rather than mortal.[/quote]

"1735 Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors."

Addictions are developed through habit and developing an inordinate attachment to worldly matter. Granted, if a person is leaning on their addiction as an excuse for sin, that could be a different matter, but even then it's difficult for someone suffering from addiction to know if they've crossed that line. The best and only real advice is to obtain a regular confessor and follow his instruction.

[quote name='fides' Jack' date='28 May 2010 - 01:04 AM' timestamp='1275019491' post='2119551']
Fortunately for us, the Church has already defined the state of being worthy, and each person must use the Church's definition to determine whether or not they are actually "worthy" to receive. No other person can make that determination for them, in normal circumstances, anyway.
[/quote]

And having a good confessor would do a person even more good in terms of applying the components of mortal sin to their personal situation.

[MissScripture]

[quote name='dominicansoul' date='28 May 2010 - 11:12 AM' timestamp='1275059553' post='2119694']
I've wondered about habitual sins, habitual addictive behavior...and how much a person is responsible for their actions. I've always thought they were totally responsible, because by their own decisions and free will, they allowed themselves to become trapped into the sin in the first place...

personally, i wouldn't dare receive Our Lord if I had committed a mortal sin...i would definitely wait until after Confession..
[/quote]
With the sins involving addiction, I have always understood that it isn't a mortal sin after it's become an addiction, but the steps leading to it being an addiction are. Because by definition of it being an addiction, the person is not able to fully exercise their free will, but they were able to use their free will to put themselves into the addiction in the first place. And, nonetheless, it wouldn't be BAD for them to abstain from communion until they'd recieved absolution, and then there would be no question.

And I agree, there is no situation in my life that I can conceive where it would be better to recieve communion with a mortal sin on my soul than to wait until after confession.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='dominicansoul' date='28 May 2010 - 12:12 PM' timestamp='1275059553' post='2119694']
I've wondered about habitual sins, habitual addictive behavior...and how much a person is responsible for their actions. I've always thought they were totally responsible, because by their own decisions and free will, they allowed themselves to become trapped into the sin in the first place...

personally, i wouldn't dare receive Our Lord if I had committed a mortal sin...i would definitely wait until after Confession..
[/quote]

Likewise. No question that mortal sin requires abstinence from Communion.

However, grave matter is not automatically mortal sin. For example, many teens get into pornography without full knowledge of the sin they're committing. Over time, under duress ("everybody does it") and repeated action (which causes the body to build a chemical dependency), one could eventually gain that full knowledge they lacked earlier in life, yet now be in a position in which their will is compromised. Let's be clear: the responsibility for putting knowledge to work through Confession, prayer, avoiding occasions of sin, finding accountability, etc. rests entirely on that person. Cooperating with grace by doing these things gives a faithful Catholic reason to have confidence in God's grace even though they aren't yet free of the sin. Failure to work at it, though, leaves a person on very dangerous ground.

In short, people aren't thinking in advance, "I'd like to get myself trapped in a cycle of grave sin." They have no idea what they're doing at first, and only as the reality of it hits after bearing the fruit of sin is the conscience awakened and the battle over the flesh ensues in full force. I'm not saying a person suffering addiction cannot fall into mortal sin as a result of whatever they're addicted to. I'm only explaining how addiction damages an otherwise faithful Catholic's free will in a sinful act.

Edited May 28, 2010 by LouisvilleFan

[fides' Jack]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='28 May 2010 - 11:01 AM' timestamp='1275062463' post='2119715']
The Code of Canon Law doesn't explicitly state anything about those commit heresy in good faith. It merely states, "Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3." (Code of Canon Law, Can. 1364 §1)



Being a heretic means that one is committing heresy at the present time. If one repents of his heresy and returns to right belief, he is no longer a heretic. It, thus, follows that being a heretic is always a sin, either formal or material.
[/quote]

Actually, the code does. Read the explanation underneath it.

So, someone who is 3 years old, and is a Protestant, is committing a sin? You can be in heresy without knowing it, and while trying to follow Truth the best you know how. And maybe there's a sin involved at that level, but surely not for those who couldn't possibly know better.

[Catholic Fox]

[quote name='fides' Jack' date='29 May 2010 - 09:18 PM' timestamp='1275185913' post='2120477']
Actually, the code does. Read the explanation underneath it.

So, someone who is 3 years old, and is a Protestant, is committing a sin? You can be in heresy without knowing it, and while trying to follow Truth the best you know how. And maybe there's a sin involved at that level, but surely not for those who couldn't possibly know better.
[/quote]

Yes, they are committing a sin. Their culpability may be reduced, but they are still committing a sin.

[fides' Jack]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' date='28 May 2010 - 04:29 PM' timestamp='1275082144' post='2119851']

Chill... I only repeated the advice given by a former confessor who is as orthodox a priest as you'll find. This stuff isn't intended for everyone to take as personal advice. We're just talking about general situations.



"1735 Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors."

[/quote]

I'm not saying you're judging anyone, I'm just pointing out the fact that we need to be really careful, because it's a very fine line between saying that here on this board, and making that accusation to someone you know in that situation.

1735 does nothing to hint at anything other than what I've said. In fact, it agrees with me: "CAN be diminished." It doesn't mean it is, and it certainly doesn't give any hint as to when we can make that determination ourselves, because we can't.

Why are we even arguing? This is pointless. We're all agreeing that Communion without confession (in the state of mortal sin) is bad, right?