What is the proper way to describe the first time a person receives communion? All the certificates and cards say “Holy Communion”, so I’m a bit confused.
First Holy Communion.
It makes no difference.
Beat me to it.
The new textbooks say First Eucharist, but old habits die hard, and all gifts and greeting cards say First Holy Communion, which I think sounds nice, but it doesn’t matter.
None of the Catechists, or parents, or anyone at the parish ever says anything but First Communion or refers to the students other than the First Communicants.
We refer to the Sacrament as Eucharist. I’m sure that some people thought First Eucharist sounded more correct. :shrug:
Our First Communion is this Sunday. 17 in English, and 39 in Spanish.
“First Eucharist” was brought in by trendies sometime after Vatican II, and i’m NOT blaming the Council for it! They just used the Council as an excuse (scapegoat?), as they did for certain other changes. [Pope (now Saint) John was inspired.]
“First Holy Communion” sounds much more reverent IMHO. :shrug:.
A data point neither here nor there, but one of the few recollections I have of being catechized in the wacky wake of Vatican II (early 1970’s) was a distinction made between First Communion and First Solemn Communion.
The latter, of course, being the Saturday in May when all the girls wore miniature wedding dresses and the boys wore coats and ties, et cetera. But the former was an encouragement to receive at the Holy Thursday Mass of the Lord’s Supper a few weeks prior. I have no idea how widespread this practice may have been, nor precisely when it may have been introduced and subsequently faded? (At least, it no longer seemed to be *a thing *when my own children made their Communions during the 1990’s)
Well, one can participate at the celebration of the Eucharist without receiving Communion, and, it’s likely that most of the children have done the former many times.
So, I think First Holy Communion is more specific and more descriptive and consequently the better terminology.
Doesn’t matter one whit.
They mean the same exact thing.
Similar to whether we call another sacrament the sacrament of “confession”, “reconciliation” or “penance”.
Hadn’t heard of that one. i’ll have to store it away inside this lead-lined skull. Maybe it didn’t catch on here.
You just triggered something. though:
Off topic but, the lousy habit of self-proclaimed devout parents waiting for the Easter Vigil Mass to have their children baptised, even if it’s many months after they’re born. “But we want to have them baptised during the lovely ceremony!”
Some parishes don’t Baptize in Lent. Save the assumptions about motivation and age.
It really is not necessary to make a slur on people who use the word Eucharist, which comes from the Greek eucharistein, and was used in Thessalonians.
Referring to ;Communion as Eucharist is not a “trendies” thing; it is a word that has usage in the Church back to St Paul. It is fine if you don’t like it, but totally unnecessary to denigrate those who use the word which the Church officially uses.
Or perhaps you consider Popes Paul VI, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI “Trendies”?
Having listened to a fair few Scott Hahn talks, i’m well aware of the origin of the word “Eucharist”.
My feeling that “First Holy Communion” sounds more reverent than “First Holy Eucharist” shouldn’t affect anyone else. It’s just my (subjective) opinion.
In any case though, if you re-read the “offending” post, you’ll notice that my problem was NOT with “First** Holy** Eucharist”, but with “First Eucharist” Big difference.
“First Eucharist” IS a trendy thing, like saying “celebrating Eucharist”, “models of church”, “worship space”, “presider’s chair” ad nauseam! Newspeak!
Tilting at a windmill.
Read the whole of a post.
Notice how in the past however many decades, belief in the Real Presence has declined sharply! We should be careful with terms.
Anyway, i’m old enough to remember the Church before the obvious decline set in.