Pope Benedicts wishes for communicants

[EcceAgnusDei]

Originally Posted by ByzCath

I would point them to where the Church speaks about frequent communion and frequent confession but I would not judge that they are in any way deficient.

I assume by "them" and "they" you are referring to the hypothetical person who only frequents the sacraments once-a-year because that is the allowed option. I would not judge them, either. I would judge the practice and not the person. I think it is safe to say that the practice of receiving frequent sacraments is more spiritually beneficial than the practice of receiving once-a-year. I think you might be hesitant to affirm this because you see that it sets a strong precedent for judging the spiritual benefit of allowed practices within the Church.

+ PAX

ETA: Just to be clear, judging in this context doesn't mean condemning, but making a judgement about something. Our relativistic culture has equated judgement with condemning, then said we shouldn't condemn and therefore we shouldn't judge. This is a false argument. We are called to judge all the time (and even the argument against judgement is a judgement).

[Friar David, O.Carm]

Originally Posted by EcceAgnusDei

You are still avoiding my argument. So I'll ask again clearly. Do you believe that allowed spiritual practices are not always the best spiritual practices?

I did answer, you just chose not to accept it.

It is not my place to judge what the best spiritual practices are for individuals. One day when/if I am a spiritual director (spiritual father) then I will be in such a place for those I direct but not for others.

For myself, no those practices are not enough for my spiritual life. But what is necessary for my spiritual life I would not say that you should do what I do.

[Friar David, O.Carm]

Originally Posted by EcceAgnusDei

I assume by "them" and "they" you are referring to the hypothetical person who only frequents the sacraments once-a-year because that is the allowed option. I would not judge them, either. I would judge the practice and not the person. I think it is safe to say that the practice of receiving frequent sacraments is more spiritually beneficial than the practice of receiving once-a-year. I think you might be hesitant to affirm this because you see that it sets a strong precedent for judging the spiritual benefit of allowed practices within the Church.

My feeling on this matter is irrelevant. I would point them to what the Church says in this matter. Judgement never enters the picture.

I do know of people who have had their spiritual father forbid them from reception of the Eucharist. How do you feel about that?

ETA: Just to be clear, judging in this context doesn't mean condemning, but making a judgement about something. Our relativistic culture has equated judgement with condemning, then said we shouldn't condemn and therefore we shouldn't judge. This is a false argument. We are called to judge all the time (and even the argument against judgement is a judgement).

Right, I see that.

But what I see here at CAF about COTT is not this sort of thing. It is judgement pure and simple. Those pushing it think it is more reverent (which is a subjective thing and not something that the Church says). some even push kneeling in this way. There is also a fringe who keep pushing that reception in the hand is a desecration of the Eucharist because of the dust from the host that is spread out.

You are trying to compare apples to oranges my friend.

[JReducation]

It seems that the issue here has become that receiving Communion or going to confession 10 times a year is a better spiritual practice than once a year. By the way, I pulled the number 10 out of my cowl.

Here is the problem, the spiritual practice is exactly the same, if you receive Holy Communion once a year or every day. The practice is the reception of the sacrament. The number of times that you receive is the frequency, not the practice.

What becomes more beneficial is the frequency, not the practice. The practice has not changed. Receiving Holy Communion, be it once or 52 times, is still receiving Holy Communion. It is the exact same practice. Practice in Church language has a totally different meaning than it does in secular language. Hence the term practicing Catholic. Practice in Church language is more like practice in medicine. It means the exercise of something. In this case, it's the exercise of receiving Holy Communion. The frequency does not alter the exercise, neither does the manner in how one receives it.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

[EcceAgnusDei]

Originally Posted by JReducation

Here is the problem, the spiritual practice is exactly the same, if you receive Holy Communion once a year or every day. The practice is the reception of the sacrament. The number of times that you receive is the frequency, not the practice.

Ok, so we're playing with semantics. I'll drop the word "practice." How about this: the Church offers us the option of receiving Holy Communion on the frequency of once a year. However, popes, saints, bishops, priests, and almost everyone else has said that receiving Holy Communion more frequently is spiritually beneficial. The same applies to confession. So, I have the option of receiving on the frequency of once a year or daily (state of grace and all, of course). The option of receiving daily is more spiritually beneficial than once a year. Therefore, the principle in operation is that the allowed options of the Church are not always equal in spiritual benefit.

Just because something is allowed does not make it equal to everything else that is allowed. The relativism at play to believe otherwise boggles my mind.

And look, I didn't use the word "practice"

+ PAX

[newyorkcatholic]

Originally Posted by EcceAgnusDei

Ok, so we're playing with semantics. I'll drop the word "practice." How about this: the Church offers us the option of receiving Holy Communion on the frequency of once a year. However, popes, saints, bishops, priests, and almost everyone else has said that receiving Holy Communion more frequently is spiritually beneficial. The same applies to confession. So, I have the option of receiving on the frequency of once a year or daily (state of grace and all, of course). The option of receiving daily is more spiritually beneficial than once a year. Therefore, the principle in operation is that the allowed options of the Church are not always equal in spiritual benefit.

Just because something is allowed does not make it equal to everything else that is allowed. The relativism at play to believe otherwise boggles my mind.

And look, I didn't use the word "practice"

+ PAX

You have a point.

We can refrain from judgment here, but we *can* acknowledge that saints and popes have made broad statements about frequent reception and it's benefits.

Also, COTT is objectively more reverent, but let's not go down that rabbit hole.

[JReducation]

Originally Posted by EcceAgnusDei

Ok, so we're playing with semantics. I'll drop the word "practice." How about this: the Church offers us the option of receiving Holy Communion on the frequency of once a year. However, popes, saints, bishops, priests, and almost everyone else has said that receiving Holy Communion more frequently is spiritually beneficial. The same applies to confession. So, I have the option of receiving on the frequency of once a year or daily (state of grace and all, of course). The option of receiving daily is more spiritually beneficial than once a year. Therefore, the principle in operation is that the allowed options of the Church are not always equal in spiritual benefit.

Just because something is allowed does not make it equal to everything else that is allowed. The relativism at play to believe otherwise boggles my mind.

And look, I didn't use the word "practice"

+ PAX

No we'er not playing with semantics here. We're speaking about a very specific issue in Sacramental Theology. The reception of Holy Communion is of great spiritual benefit to the soul. That's the starting point.

The more frequent reception of Holy Communion is not more beneficial than receiving once a year in this sense. The benefit is in the reception, not in the number of times that one receives.

When we say that it is of great benefit to receive the sacrament frequently we're not talking about something cumulative. We're speaking about the singular event. Each time that you receive the sacrament you receive sanctifying grace. But you're not going to have more sanctifying grace, because you receive daily as opposed to once a year. What you have is the reception of sanctifying grace more frequently.

The great spiritual masters and teachers are saying that if you want to be in a constant state of sanctifying grace, you have to constantly receive the sacraments. Why? Because we tend to blow the sanctifying grace that we received, by the effects of sin. So, we need to go to confession again and receive Communion again. They're not saying that sanctifying grace accumulates because you receive more often. If we said that, then it would be relative.

By the way, the term relativism is not a dirty word. Some things are relative, but they are meant to be relative. When the Church uses the word, she uses it in different contexts and not all of them are bad. For those reading, don't panic every time you see that word. Look at the context in which it's being used.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

[Melchior_]

So Brother JR, correct me if I'm wrong; but you're saying that we all have a Sanctifying Grace Meter, from 0 - 10. Receiving the Eucharist will bring us up to a 10. Frequent reception of the Eucharist allows us to be at a 10 more often due to topping us up on Grace each time we receive.

It does not allow us to go over 10 though, 10 is the highest.

So if we go to Mass three times a week, that would mean for those three days we'd be at Grace Level 10 each day, NOT Grace Level 30,

Because going up to 11 would mean we're in Heaven.

[EcceAgnusDei]

Originally Posted by Melchior_

So Brother JR, correct me if I'm wrong; but you're saying that we all have a Sanctifying Grace Meter, from 0 - 10. Receiving the Eucharist will bring us up to a 10. Frequent reception of the Eucharist allows us to be at a 10 more often due to topping us up on Grace each time we receive.

It does not allow us to go over 10 though, 10 is the highest.

So if we go to Mass three times a week, that would mean for those three days we'd be at Grace Level 10 each day, NOT Grace Level 30,

Because going up to 11 would mean we're in Heaven.

I'll follow this analogy. It is a better option to frequently receive the Eucharist because it is better to be at a 10 more often. So yes, the option to frequently receive is better than the option to only receive once a year. Thus the principle holds: not all allowed options are equal in spiritual benefit.

+ PAX

[EcceAgnusDei]

Originally Posted by JReducation

But you're not going to have more sanctifying grace, because you receive daily as opposed to once a year. What you have is the reception of sanctifying grace more frequently.

Is it better to have the reception of sanctifying grace more frequently or less frequently?

+ PAX

[Melchior_]

Originally Posted by EcceAgnusDei

Is it better to have the reception of sanctifying grace more frequently or less frequently?

+ PAX

It's possible the Church listed "once a year" because it's appealing to those who are lost. Some people will only try to hit the minimum requirement, and wouldn't set into a church *at all* with it being any more than that. With that minimum, you never know; God could work through them. So in that sense, having a minimum works, because that gets people who'd have no Grace "top up" at all have a dose of it.

I dunno, a hypothesis, this is.

[clem456]

Originally Posted by Melchior_

So Brother JR, correct me if I'm wrong; but you're saying that we all have a Sanctifying Grace Meter, from 0 - 10. Receiving the Eucharist will bring us up to a 10. Frequent reception of the Eucharist allows us to be at a 10 more often due to topping us up on Grace each time we receive.

It does not allow us to go over 10 though, 10 is the highest.

So if we go to Mass three times a week, that would mean for those three days we'd be at Grace Level 10 each day, NOT Grace Level 30,

Because going up to 11 would mean we're in Heaven.

Is grace quantifiable? Can it be reduced and "boxed" in this way?
I would observe that atheists use similar thinking to deny God:: reality is only observable and quantifiable, measurable. Don't we try to limit God when we do this? Or when we attempt to validate certain very particular forms of worship as "more grace filled' or reverent, when the reality of grace transcends the particular physical practice?

[TimothyH]

Originally Posted by EcceAgnusDei

Is it better to have the reception of sanctifying grace more frequently or less frequently?

+ PAX

I tell you, in just the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need of repentance. (Luke 15:7)

-Tim-

[EcceAgnusDei]

Originally Posted by TimothyH

I tell you, in just the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need of repentance. (Luke 15:7)

-Tim-

Can you explain how your quote relates to my question? What point are you trying to make and what is your answer to my question? Thanks

+ PAX

[JReducation]

Originally Posted by Melchior_

So Brother JR, correct me if I'm wrong; but you're saying that we all have a Sanctifying Grace Meter, from 0 - 10. Receiving the Eucharist will bring us up to a 10. Frequent reception of the Eucharist allows us to be at a 10 more often due to topping us up on Grace each time we receive.

It does not allow us to go over 10 though, 10 is the highest.

So if we go to Mass three times a week, that would mean for those three days we'd be at Grace Level 10 each day, NOT Grace Level 30,

Because going up to 11 would mean we're in Heaven.

I never heard it put in those terms before. I don't think you can quantify sanctifying grace. It's something that we have or don't have. The more frequently we receive the sacraments, the greater our chances of dying in sanctifying grace.

Originally Posted by EcceAgnusDei

Is it better to have the reception of sanctifying grace more frequently or less frequently?

+ PAX

I just answered that one above. Look up.

Originally Posted by TimothyH

I tell you, in just the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need of repentance. (Luke 15:7)

-Tim-

BINGO!!!

I would add something else here. People are saying that the saints and doctors said that we should go to confession and receive Holy Communion more frequently than not. This is not entirely true. This is a rather modern concept, given the age of the Church.

I'll give a simple example. If you read the rules of St. Benedict and St. Francis, they mention Confession once a year and Holy Communion twice a year. If you study the history of Carmel, you find that the Carmelites did not receive daily Holy Communion until after the 16th century. Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross never mention it as a must do as frequently as possible. Franciscans received Holy Communion only at Christmas and Easter and they gave Holy Communion to the laity on those days alone until the 14th or 15th century.

I'm not sure what doctors and saints people are speaking of. But if you're speaking of any from the Middle Ages back, they don not advocate for frequent confession or Communion, because it was not the practice. That gradually becomes the practice after the Renaissance. It does not spread equally. It takes hold in some places faster than others. Even daily mass was rare until after the Middle Ages. In some Eastern Churches, they don't have Divine Liturgy everyday. They're just as Catholic as we are. Their belief on this point is a little different.

We can't say, "They all said this." They did not. They said it when the Church allowed it to be frequently available.

Fraternally,

Br.JR, FFV