Communion

We live in crazy times. Everywhere, faithful Catholics lament the long Communion lines and short Confession lines - this is true everywhere. We are either a Church filled with Saints or a Church filled with sinners pretending to be Saints. I am one of the latter on the best of days.

Every day, every Sunday, every Holy Day - whenever we as Catholics attend Mass and have an opportunity to receive Holy Communion, we should be aware of our spiritual condition and act accordingly. Yet some people wonder if they can or should attend Mass at all if they are aware of mortal sin. They have been quite literally taught that receiving Holy Communion is the highest form of "participation" and therefore they MUST do this.

Perhaps that wasn't what was truly being taught, but that is what they heard and the impression they continue to hold. Why attend Mass if one cannot go forward for Holy Communion? Few people remain in the pew in an average Catholic Church (I hear the Latino parishes tell a different story - most DON'T receive).

Our society in general is one of entitlement; if I attend this I must receive that. 

It is OWED to me. I have a RIGHT to it. Very quickly that owing and "right" become a "requirement" or the entire event is meaningless. We are a society of "I must receive something or it's not worth my time."

The problem is this: Grace is conferred in ways that are hidden. One can receive Holy Communion in a state of grace but not benefit at all if  one is not really open to the Grace available. Grace is received according to the disposition of the recipient. Not my rules; those are God's own observations and the reality of the spiritual life. If we aren't open, we may receive Our Lord, but He will dissipate with no effect if we refuse to receive what He has to offer.

If we receive Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin, we kill ourselves, spiritually. We become dead to the effects of Grace because we have committed the sin of Sacrilege. 

Today I attended Mass, the Feast of All Saints, and admit it was a temptation to not attend even though it is a Holy Day of Obligation. I "felt" unworthy. I "wondered" deep within if I should enter the presence of the Almighty if I could not receive Him. Scandalized by my own interior wanderings, the thought barely crossed my mind and I banished it back to Hell from whence it had come. I was not able to make it to Confession and knew I should not receive Our Lord.  I also knew that it was even MORE important that I attend Mass, where I could make a Spiritual Communion while remaining in my pew, praying heartily for my own conversion to a life of holiness, to overcome my sin by leaning even more heavily upon God.

There have been several occasions in which I have had had to abstain from Holy Communion, whether because of mortal sin or simply my disposition at that moment. Always, I meditate on what it is like to be out of communion with the Church, to be separated from God. It is just as important to recognize what we may suffer eternally as it is to reflect upon and hope for eternal beatitude - both contain deep spiritual messages we need to ponder intensely.

Always, though, it seems that God reaches out to me, no matter what my state. It seems that whenever I abstain from Holy Communion, there is a friend in the pew in front or behind me, or even in my same pew. At some point, God shines through them, reminding me that although perhaps my sin has cut me off from Holy Communion, I am not abandoned. A friend passes by and where they would normally do so without a word or signal, on those days I abstain, even if they don't know that I am doing so, they reach out to squeeze my hand.

This evening was no exception. Tonight, I learned during the Sign of Peace that a few friends were seated behind me and one actually asked me quickly, "How have you been?" as we exchanged the Sign. Another couple friends, as they skirted past me to go forward, tapped me on the shoulder; a sign of encouragement.

Tonight, instead of a sense of dejection, of separation, I made my Spiritual Communion with a sense of profound joy. I have been claimed by Christ, and even though I separated myself through sin, I have truly repented of that sin and attended Mass to worship God with my Catholic family. As a Catholic, I am not exiled because I am weak. I am simply aware of my own impurity at the Wedding Feast of Our Lord.

As I've pondered before and did so again tonight, simply remaining in the pew during Holy Communion is a sign, too - of Faith. Of Hope. Of Love. 

It sends a signal to others that I truly BELIEVE that this is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ. Even we who cannot receive due to sin, disposition, irregular canonical issues, or even being non-Catholic, reveal Truth. Today, with my body and soul I still gave Glory to God by refusing to partake, for I know that He is Truly Present and my reception would have profaned what is Most Holy.

There are times where I have stepped over others while going forward to receive and I always stop myself from wondering; are they not Catholic? Have they not been to Confession? Are they angry with me for tripping over their children while I tried to get to "my" pew?

The answers to the questions I suppress in my mind are not important. The strongest message I receive from those in the pew during Communion is this:  they remain there because Jesus Christ is Truly and Substantially Present in the Holy Eucharist. Their place reveals more than the lines going forward. I see more reverence in those who abstain than in those who receive.

I do not mean to say that my own abstinence today is something to be glorified; it's not. I am a sinner and I COULD NOT receive, and for that, I am ashamed. I am sorry, Jesus, for my sin. I am sorry that I lacked the proper disposition to receive You.

That said, it is only that a lesson came home to me today; about the volumes spoken in silence and mystery, about the witness of Faith given by the weakest members of the Church on any given day, who testify not by going forward, but by taking the last place.

It is they who give me the courage and instill in me the virtue to honor Christ more perfectly, especially when I have sinned.

May the entire Communion of Saints pray for us all so that we may always honor Christ and grow to be more like Him every day of our lives. 

Women's "Ordination" is Preposterous

I've written before on the absolute idiocy of advancing the idea of "priestesses" in the Catholic Church, but this week something else really struck me. The fact is...the Church doesn't exclude women, but rather...She excludes MEN!

** skip down for the focus of this post. The following is actually just background.***

The people trying to advance the feminist agenda firstly have NO IDEA what the Church really is. They don't understand her. They are at odds with everything she teaches and don't even realize why we call her "Holy Mother Church." Even if they use the term, they do so out of a deep misunderstanding which could be corrected if they would simply be open enough to Truth to truly learn something outside of the box within which they've hidden themselves.

There was a time that I thought it would be ok to have female "priests", although I actually wasn't a practicing Catholic and didn't know my Ecclesiology, either. I also hadn't read the Vatican II documents, had NO IDEA what they said, or what the 1st Vatican Council declared, or the Council of Trent...etc., etc. etc. And in fact, I'm STILL learning. It takes TIME to learn.

And a little dose of humility, I guess. I had to learn I was wrong and suck it up. I had to listen to logic, to objective facts, and allow the Holy Spirit to change my heart. It didn't happen overnight. It won't for the dissidents of today, either.

Don't give up on them. Pray for them.

Back to the topic: "Womynpriestesses"

The charge many level against the Church is that she is "oppressive" and "patriarchal" and "male-dominated" and "exclusive". They say she isn't "welcoming" to women.

I've written on this before, a few times.

The fact that people make this charge reveals not that the Church is evil, but that those making such a claim are ignorant as to what scripture reveals and the Divine Revelation passed on to us through the Magisterial teachings of the Church which are...by the way...Apostolic.

Books have been written about this, so I'm going to make only a few points, a la Summa:

On Common Objections to the Church as she relates to Women:

Objection 1: The Church excludes women. Women have no place in the Church.

Objection 2: The Church had a female deaconate and I see no reason why that shouldn't be revived.

Objection 3: The Church is Patriarchal

On the Contrary: All of the above objections are made out of ignorance or simply misunderstand proper context.

I answer that: People who make such claims have a burden of proof upon them to prove their case and not a single one has actually been successful. Those who try find the Truth ultimately abandon the lies they hold so viciously and dearly to themselves, and, surprised by immense joy and freedom, they enter into the Church as true Sons and Daughters. It is truly beautiful to behold someone set free.

Reply to Objection 1: Anyone who would claim that women have no place in the Church clearly don't darken the door of their local parish very often. Women run EVERYTHING, from finance committees, to liturgy commissions, are involved in every single overuse of the word "ministry" and then some, are highly visible, and in fact, it's like pulling teeth to get men involved in anything that isn't recreational. Why? Because women are in the way doing everything and bragging that no matter what it is, they can do it better. No, I'm not making this up. Some parishes are better than others in that regard, however.

On the Theology end, this objection raises the very obvious reality that someone who would say such a thing reveals willful ignorance at worst, or brainwashing by bad "scholars" at best.

The fact is, the Church is feminine. Catholicism is a very sensual religion; consider the scents (incense, beeswax candles, flowers, pine in winter, etc.), textures, colors, stained glass, sacred art, sacred music (not modern music but sacred music), spirituality....it all exudes femininity. And that's all on the surface! Catholicism is in what we can observe in all of our senses, and all of that draws us into something that transcends our very being!

St. Jerome famously said, "Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ!" He is right! And it goes even deeper...to know Christ, one must know the Church, and one cannot know the Church without a proper reading of scripture!

The Old Testament faith introduced the marriage theology of the Church, which was profoundly revealed in the New Testament in Luke, in the Gospel of John (Wedding at Cana, the foot of the Cross), and in Revelation, as well as in the writings of Paul, among others. We see the "Woman" introduced to us in Genesis flowing throughout the scriptures, finding her place in the Great Mothers, in many women of great valor, in the psalms, all revealing Israel not by honoring patriarchy...but by honoring Israel as a woman.

In a deep study, that "woman" is revealed to be Mary, who joins the Old and New Covenants, who stands in the place of the Church under the New Covenant, and we find that if we don't understand Mary...we don't fully understand Christ. She points to Him, and...He binds with US!

WE are the Bride of Christ, a holy nation, Daughter Zion, the New Jerusalem, as foretold throughout the Old Testament! The Church by her very nature and being is feminine! Everything ABOUT the Church is feminine!

We can hack her hair off and strip her of her garments, we can make the Church look "butch" to the outside eye, but we can't change her intrinsic beauty, we can't violate that which cannot be violated for she is under the protection of her spouse, the Holy Spirit.

To suggest that the Church has no place for women is to fail to understand that the Church IS Woman, men and women alike. Yes...in the Church, men are Brides, too. Together, we are all Brides of Christ and that marriage union with Him takes place when we consummate the Holy Sacrifice at Holy Communion.

And we profane our lover, our Bridegroom, when we receive Him in a state of mortal sin.

How, exactly, is the Church exclusive of women when everything She is about is...feminine?

Reply to Objection 2: Indeed, the early Church had female "diakonos" (I might have spelled that wrong, readers please correct my spelling.) Today that word is read as "deacons" or "deaconate", and yes, it's true such people served the early Church and that some were women. However....to suggest that they were the same as our Ordained Deaconate today is, again, a statement belonging to ignorance, not scholarship.

In the early Church, Baptisms were done by full immersion, if my understanding is correct. Women were conscripted to protect the modesty of other women and to serve in other ways. In fact the word "Diakonos" meant "servant" and did NOT indicate ordained ministry.

There has NEVER been record in the Catholic Church of women being ordained. Using a word that has developed a new meaning over thousands of years, and applying a modern definition to history to support modern misunderstanding is intellectually dishonest.

As an aside, it is also fallacious to suggest that Christ COULDN'T make women priests; the fact was that the pagan cultures ran rampant with women "priestesses" and they were actually involved in temple prostitution and fertility rites. Contrast that with the dignity the Church recognizes of Women today, that we are not here for men's pleasure but rather, that we reflect the image and likeness of God.

Get down on your knees and thank Our Lord for saving us from a culture that used us and threw us away to be left or dead, or used us and stoned us to death!

Reply to Objection 3: Indeed, the Church is Patriarchal, in the sense that Christ in His Divine wisdom instituted an all-male priesthood, and consequently, as it belongs to the deposit of the Faith, Tradition, and the reality of our theology, the Church does not have the authority to ordain women.

Christ didn't will a female priesthood, and it would make no theological sense to have one. It's not up for discussion, nor will it ever be so. It IS an infallible teaching. Period.

The fact is, in looking at the totality of the Church, the ONLY thing that belongs to men at all is the Sacrament of Holy Orders! That's it! That's all they get!

If we are to be honest, we have to see that if ANYONE is excluded in the Church...it's MEN!

If the Church is to be fruitful, She NEEDS the Patriarchy, the male priesthood, which stands in for Christ, the Bridegroom. A woman cannot stand in the place of Christ for she cannot be a Bridegroom. She cannot offer the Sacrifice of the Cross, she cannot be Christ. She is designed to be maternal, not paternal, just as the Church is designed to be maternal and receive the Word, and bear it out to the world. It belongs to men to deliver the Word to the receptive Bride.

We come full circle to the marriage theology of the Church, which can ONLY be fulfilled and expressed through an all-male Priesthood and feminine Church.

**

My friends, ignore the cries of the blind who cry out that they are "oppressed" by the Church: the only oppression they suffer is their refusal to open their eyes and see, open their ears to hear, open their hearts to God's love. They are stuck in Isaiah, living the "life" of a disobedient and adulterous Israel, giving themselves to political alliances, disdaining trust in God and obedience to His Commandments.

The Church isn't oppressive; she is Maternal. She is our Holy Mother, in whose arms we take refuge, there, with her under the shadow of the Cross. The Cross is Salvation; anything outside is real oppression.

The ONLY thing that makes sense is a male-only Priesthood! To allow women, Our Lord knew, would destroy the Covenant and make His Bride into the Harlot of the Pagan cultures from which He came to save us.

God our Father is faithful to Himself and to His Covenant; if we choose to disobey, we leave the Covenantal relationship behind, we leave the Marriage of the Lamb, and we become nothing more than pagan prostitutes worshiping idols in meaningless fertility rites that deny our final end and bar us from eternal beatitude.

If you believe in women's ordination, support it, take part in it...it is YOU who leave the Church. SHE hasn't left YOU. Why would you ever leave your Mother in order to make a false idol in your own image?

***************************

Commenting Policy: I allow anonymous comments. For the sake of courtesy, sign some kind of name, which blogger gives you the option to enter without being registered. If you behave like a Troll, you'll be deleted and no, I don't have to justify that decision. My blog, my rules, my judgment. Disagree if you'd like, but don't be a jerk about it.

Answers to Many Questions

For some time, I've been taking note of the search engine questions that bring people to my blog. Oddly enough, they often happen upon posts that have absolutely NOTHING to do with their question. Sometimes it IS the right post, but perhaps I didn't address their particular question there.

And so, I've decided, maybe it's time to post some of the answers to the questions people are putting into the search engines, for many people are looking for similiar things. I have written about MOST of the following in the past so this post is to give the short answer. You may need to do more research to find a more complete answer to your question.

Can I go to Communion if I skipped Mass? No. If you intentionally skipped Sunday Mass, then you have committed a mortal (grave) sin and you need to go to Sacramental Confession before you receive Communion again. Additionally, if you skip Daily Mass and just show up for Communion, you should not receive. The Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist are in the Mass for a reason and you need ALL of it to prepare to receive the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. (You can read the entire post on this and get a more complete answer here.)

Do I have to go to Confession in order to receive Communion? If you have committed grave sin, then you are required to go to Confession before you can receive Communion. However, you can still ATTEND Mass, and you SHOULD, but if you haven't been able to get to Confession, DO NOT RECEIVE HOLY COMMUNION! No one cares if you remain in your pew, so don't commit sacrilege out of a misplaced sense of self-consciousness.

If I'm not Catholic, can I receive Communion in a Catholic Church? No. This is not to make you feel "left out", but rather, to protect the integrity of our beliefs AND your differing beliefs. We believe that the bread and wine truly become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ during the Consecration. When we go forward to receive Holy Communion, we are declaring in our very actions and intentions that we are free from grave sin, that we believe everything the Church teaches, and that we KNOW what we are receiving. When we say "Amen", we are stating verbally that WE BELIEVE THIS IS JESUS CHRIST!

If you are not Catholic, then you clearly don't believe what we believe, so why would you want to publicly lie and say that you do have that belief? And in fact, if you have done research and DO share that belief...then what is stopping you from becoming Catholic? You can enter an RCIA class and through a time of prayer and education, be received into the Church. (FYI: You can also attend RCIA classes if you're just trying to learn more about the Church and aren't sure if you want to be Catholic or not. Attending classes isn't a committment to convert!)

Can I have coffee before Mass? As long as you finish your coffee one hour before Holy Communion. Water and medicine do not break the fast, but coffee does.

Can I have gum at Mass? No. Gum does not fall under the category of "water and medicine" and so breaks the fast. Some people who should know better have said that gum "isn't food", however Canon Law 919 specifies that ONLY water and medicine are allowed. It doesn't say "anything that isn't food". If your gum can legitimately be considered to be medicine then maybe you can have it, although I wouldn't consider "nicotine gum" be some something you couldn't survive without for an hour or so. Don't be a wuss. Sacrifice is good for you!

Now...if you are not intending to receive Holy Communion, it is considered to be disrespectful to have coffee and gum at Mass. Please refrain and have those things AFTER Mass. Thank you.

"Not attending Mass because I'm being ignored" ~ You know, a lot of people seem to cite this as a reason not to attend Mass. In typing it in a search engine, I don't know if the question is being posed by someone looking for a way to overcome this objection, or if they themselves think they're being ignored and they're looking to justify not attending Mass. So! Here's the answer, and I'm going to make it VERY easy:

Mass is NOT about you! It's about GOD! If YOU are "being ignored", then Praise God! It means that everyone there knows that Mass is the time to worship God, and in so doing, to be present at the Sacrifice of Our Lord! So take the hint, take your focus off of yourself and spend an hour focusing on your Creator who loves you so much He DIED for you! What MORE could you possibly WANT???

"Distracted in prayer" ~ OK, this one is harder and I don't really have an answer. It's something with which we ALL struggle. But, don't be too hard on yourself. If you get distracted, just try to bring your attention back to God. In making that attempt, it is an act of love. If you're going through a period of dryness and you're having trouble praying, or maybe you have ADHD and can't make it through a rosary, then simply pray ONE Hail Mary. Or ONE Our Father. Or even a short prayer to Jesus to help you! Even if the only thing you can pray is "Jesus, I love you!", guess what...that's a prayer! Does it solve distraction? No. But perseverance does. Keep praying!

Patron Saint of Prostitutes ~ The posts I wrote on that remain among my most popular. So....there are 2 Patron Saints of Prostitutes: St. Nicholas (yes, "Santa Clause") Why? Because he saved two girls from being sold into prostitution by their father. This is also among the reason he's also a Patron Saint of children. The OTHER Patron Saint of Prostitutes is St. Mary of Egypt, because she had been a prostitute, reformed, and, well....achieved the heights of holiness which the Church acknowledged by declaring her a Saint!

And for those who are looking for a Saint that ENDORSES prostitution: there isn't one. Saints don't endorse sin, and no, none of us has the authority to decide what is or isn't a sin. Prostitution is a horrible evil in this fallen world and it CANNOT be justified. I hope that answers your question.

Rinsing Saurkraut: Yes, you have to rinse saurkraut. I found that out by looking it up on a cooking website.

Oppression of Women in the Bible : It's a common myth advanced by the feminist regimes that the Bible is oppressive to women. The reality is that although the Bible IS a patriarchal book, it's a very HUMAN book and naturally the patriarchal society is going to be quite apparent. Making the Bible into one with inclusive language is a really stupid attempt to change a fact of history. Secondly, Christianity was actually FREEING to women, who were, in those times, considered to be PROPERTY. Christ gave them the freedom to do something different. It was radical. No, He did not establish them as priests, for if He wanted to do that, He would have made his Mother a priest. Instead, Jesus emphasized the importance of women in salvation history. Now, if you're going to cite Paul's blustery stuff about women, go take a look at history and take this in the proper context. Much of what he was saying he was saying TO women who were finally receiving an education, and didn't know how to behave in an educational setting. He had to teach them manners! Which is completely reasonable, for even in our society teachers have to lay ground rules for the order of their classrooms, whether we are there as adults or children. Are YOU oppressed? Neither were they.

Did Vatican II do away with Latin? No. If you read the Vatican II Document on the Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium (which, as you notice, is a Latin title), you'll see that the only changes called for were a permission to use the vernacular in the readings, an addition of more scripture readings, and Latin/Gregorian Chant were to remain the norm in all the other parts of the Mass.

Note also that every document issued by the Church has a Latin title, and the ONLY language of the Code of Canon Law is....Latin. The few translations out there include the Latin because Latin is more precise and anyone versed in the Law must also look to the usage of Latin since the vernacular translations are often inaccurate and can change the original meaning of the law.

Feast Day of Our Lady of Perpetual Help: June 27 :-)

Does God give us more than we can bear? Yes, He does. And He does it so that we can learn to rely on HIM and not ourselves.

Well, there's at least some of the questions. I hope the answers are helpful to someone!

Know that the answers may not be complete, I'm happy to answer anything else that I can or clarify something, and I'm certain my readers would join in as well if someone posts a question below. As always, don't rely on blogs for the perfect answers. If you are really seeking especially theological answers, then go to the proper sources: Sacred Scripture, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Documents of Vatican I, Vatican II, Council of Trent (yes, they are ALL relevant!), etc.

:-)

How Many Times in One Day Can I Receive Holy Communion?

I’ve often heard this question, whether it was addressed to someone on Catholic radio, to a parish priest, or even from volunteers in a parish. I've repeated to people what I'd heard through credible sources, although I've since learned that SOME of those sources were wrong. (Stop looking so shocked. Catholic apologists, whether lay or clergy, are human, too!)

In Canon Law class last month, we addressed this very query, but with a proper foundation in reading the law.

Can. 18 states, “Laws which establish a penalty, restrict the free exercise of rights, or contain an exception from the law are subject to strict interpretation.”

A “strict interpretation” is reading the law to the very letter. Not reading into it and placing things there that are simply not present.

So let’s look at Canon 917, which addresses how many times in one day one can receive Holy Communion:

Can. 917: “A person who has already received the Most Holy Eucharist can receive it a second time on the same day only within the eucharistic celebration in which the person participates, without prejudice to the prescript of Can. 921.”

(As an FYI, Can. 921 s 2 addresses Viaticum and reads: “Even if they have been nourished by holy communion on the same day, however those in danger of death are strongly urged to receive communion again”)

Objection 1: I heard someone on the radio state that Holy Communion can only be received twice if the Mass is a different type of Mass, i.e. the first one is a Daily Mass, the second a Wedding. Or a Wedding early in the day and then the Sunday Vigil Mass later. Therefore, one could not receive communion the second time if they went to two daily Masses.

Objection 2: That means that if someone has already received Holy Communion, and goes to Mass again later, but is late and misses the first reading, they are prohibited from receiving a second time.

ON THE CONTRARY: These objections are a perfect example of reading something into the Law that isn’t there.

REPLY TO OBJECTION 1: I answer that: Canon Law states only that the second reception must take place within the Eucharistic celebration in which the person participates. That could be another daily Mass, it could be a wedding, a funeral, a second Sunday Mass. Canon Law does not give a distinction.

Thus we must strictly read and adhere to the law, and what it actually says, remembering Canon 18. As it would be a restriction of a right to tell someone that they can receive only at a second Mass celebrated for a different purpose, Canon 18 applies. In light of Canon 18, reading Canon 917 to the letter, we see that the ONLY requirement (outside of the Sacrament of the Sick) is that the second reception of Holy Communion requires participation in a Eucharistic celebration.

REPLY TO OBJECTION 2: Canon Law does not say that the person cannot receive if they are late; only that they must participate. If the person arrives late and participates to the degree possible, there is no reason, under Canon Law, why they would not be able to receive if they otherwise have the proper disposition. However, there may be another Church document outside of Canon Law that would address this issue. I will simply state that if we read Canon 917, it does not address lateness, only participation. We cannot read into the Law something that simply is not addressed within it. As "participation" is not defined, it is not a part of the decision as to whether someone can or cannot receive Holy Communion a second time if they arrive late to the eucharistic celebration.

The purpose of Canon Law is not to govern every small thing that people do, and should not and cannot be used to find out things such as how late one can be to Mass before receiving Holy Communion. If you or someone you know wants to justify arriving late to Mass at any point, you will NOT find that justification in Canon Law, either.

***** NOTE: The word "participation" does not mean "doing stuff" like serving as an Extraordinary Minister, or Lector, or Usher. That is a complete misreading of the term. ALL of us, when we attend Mass or some other "Eucharistic celebration" are participating by being engaged with the prayers, knowing what is going on, actively listening and paying attention, etc.

The Saints often used the term "Assist at Holy Mass." They weren't running all over the Church "doing stuff", but rather, were in the pews, standing, sitting, kneeling, praying. The word these days, instead of "assist" has become "participate", and means the same thing now as it did when the Saints referred to it.

Thus, the word "participation" in Canon 917 should be understood to be Mass attendance.

*****

Note: Canon Law is not interpreted in a vacuum, but also in light of moral law. A lot of people have questions about "how late is late" in order for their Mass attendance to be considered "full participation." Well, that question isn't answered in Canon Law as it belongs to a larger issue. Why are you late? On purpose? Habitually? Habitually on purpose? Because you got a flat tire en route and were delayed? Some priests I know say you should hear the first reading and on, others have said for certain to be present for the Gospel. All would say that you can't just show up for Mass at Communion time and receive. That is an abuse, just as is receiving and immediately departing. So...look to moral law for that question, look to a properly formed conscience.

****

Prudence

I really love how God works.

The post I wrote on Tuesday evening is not something I would speak to a real crowd (certainly maybe elements, but NOT in that way!), and I wrote it to deal with my own jitters. Much of what I write on this blog is to convict me. The point of that one; no matter how gutless I feel, it doesn't matter. There is an expectation I must live up to, and that is to speak the truth when I teach. I don't get many occasions to teach, literally two per year. For those who are not practicing Catholics, some of those teachings can seem harsh, not because of the way it's delivered, but because their own consciences are convicting them.

I know this from personal experience.

And I do share that personal experience when I speak to people. Last year I kept it at a minimum (with the exception of my Confession story), but this year I'll be adding in more.

Yesterday, I spoke with a woman who attends the parish with her family, is in some serious financial straits, and looking for options with regard to her children's formation. She is not Catholic, but is raising them "sorta" Catholic. She considers all religions to be the same, and sees no problem with receiving Holy Communion in a Catholic Church. She stated several times that she doesn't feel that ANYONE has the right to tell someone they can't receive Holy Communion.

Ironically, she does believe that the bread and wine truly become the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ. She does not believe they are mere symbols, but the actual presence of Christ. She doesn't believe in going to Confession, but asks forgiveness when she receives.

And to make things trickier...even though she believes a lot of what the Church teaches, she has also been "turned off" by the Catholic Church by someone very close to her who so denigrated the traditions from which she comes that she does not want to become Catholic. (That...and she doesn't think the Church can claim any authority beyond that of the myriad of denominations.)

So our conversation was one that took a lot of care. I never ONCE came out and stated she should not be receiving Communion...not directly. I kept it general, but to the point, simply explaining the teachings of who can receive and why, how we must be prepared, etc. Had I stated outright, "You should not be receiving Communion here", well, it would have been the end of the conversation.

Instead, she listened, she stated her position, and I did my best, knowing it's not my job to convert her. It's my job to give her the teachings, and she is honestly interested in learning, but it was clear she was not interested in internalizing. Not yet, but who knows? Maybe in the future.

We all have to remember that conversion implies a relationship. We have a duty to establish that relationship, and lead people to Christ. But we can't force them there at gunpoint or scream and yell in condemnation.

That conversation yesterday, when she revealed her beliefs and what she was doing, well...parts of what she said caused physical pain. A couple times I was nearly in tears. I wasn't angry or outraged...just intensely sorrowful that someone could come so close, and yet be so far away and so unwilling to be reached.

But it starts there, sometimes.

Working in a church has really opened my eyes to the state of real people. A lot of bloggers out there just love to rant and condemn, and I used to do that a LOT. And yes, I still mean what I said yesterday, although such a rant would only appy to a specific audience. Not people like the one I spoke with yesterday. Such a rant would destroy her, spiritually.

Some people expressed that they thought I SHOULD state what I wrote in my little pretend speech. I disagreed from the very beginning, and yesterday's conversation brought that very reality home to me.

We must place a guard on our lips, lest by our rash words we chase people away from Christ forever. And WE would be held responsible for such an exodus.

We say we're not willing to go to Hell for anyone, and that's true. But we have to consider that, if we are imprudent, we may end up doing just that.

"Set a guard over my mouth, O Lord,
keep watch over the door of my lips! ~ Psalm 141

Presenting Ourselves for Holy Communion

In my previous post, in which I discussed nearly missing an opportunity for Confession, a couple commenters brought up an important point. Although their point did not apply in my case (as I was not at the church to attend Mass that evening), it COULD apply to some people and so I thought this would be a good opportunity to discuss our approach of the Sacraments.

Just this afternoon, I spoke with a teen who had visited a parish offering a Spanish language Mass, and he noticed that only about half of the Spanish-speaking people who attended did not present themselves for Holy Communion, and he wondered why...for in his home parish EVERYONE goes to Communion.

It was an opportunity to discuss the need of us to receive the Lord only if we are in a state of grace so as to avoid profaning the Body and Blood of Christ. And he understood this, yet by his query, I realized that others likely wonder about the same thing...why are people not going forward at Communion?

It goes back again to the idea that we NEED to have a certain desperation for the Sacraments, something completely lacking in our culture for they are so abundantly offered. We also, in this country, have an attitude of entitlement; that we have a "right" to something, and through some very lacking catechesis, many have never been taught the reality of personal sin, of taking responsiblity for sin, and that they cannot present themsevles for Holy Communion if they have committed mortal sin.

The teachings have been so watered down for a few generations that Catholics today think nothing of deciding for themselves that their sins are not mortal because they don't see anything wrong with something "everyone" in society is doing. And so we have short Confession lines, and long Communion lines. Or, I guess it's entirely possible that we have many parishes filled to the brim with perfect Saints who have no need to confess what they haven't done.

Right.

Now, it's important to say that if you have not messed up insanely and committed mortal sin, you don't need to go to Confession every time you go to Mass. And, of course, if you ARE in a state of grave sin, you STILL have the obligation to ATTEND Mass on Sunday, however, you should refrain from going to Communion until you've received Sacramental Confession. The same applies for Daily Mass...if you are in a state of grave sin, you can and should still attend Mass, but remain in your pew and make a Spiritual Communion through prayer, and resolve to receive the Sacrament of Penance as soon as you are able.

Last night, if my intention was to attend Mass and I had not been in time for Confession, I would not have presented myself for Communion. In the past, my parish did not offer the Sacrament before Mass, but afterwards, and in fact, this was an important factor in my conversion! I could not receive Communion, and attending Mass without being able to receive what I realized was truly the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ was the very thing that goaded me to overcome my fear and go to Confession!

Thus if you discern that you might not be in a state of grace, DO attend Mass and let your abstinence from Holy Communion serve to pierce your soul, forcing you to realize the union you no longer have with our Lord. Gaze upon the Crucifix and comprehend how deeply and passionately He loves you...and allow that love to bring you to the throne of His Mercy in the Sacrament of Confession.

*

Desperation for the Sacraments

This evening I left work earlier than planned because I REALLY needed to get to Confession, and there is a traffic snarl reminiscent of Hell in the general area of my home. The main highway bottlenecks a few miles before my exit, so during rush hour I always exit before I hit the backup. But there's a parallel route that is under construction and down to one lane, and two days ago I learned about than when I had taken that particular route home. But I got off before the major construction, and learned that had I come to that shortcut from the North instead of the south, I would have had to backtrack...because the connecting road was COMPLETELY closed due to construction. Whew!, I thought to myself. Dodged that one!

BUT! I have since learned that ALL possible alternate routes are completely useless...3 of them are under construction, and of those, 2 are completely blocked!

Knowing this, I left work early and took the last possible route only to learn that, ironically, it would have been better to just stay on the main highway...at least THAT was inching along. Not like the gridlock on the side streets!

So it was that I was biting my nails and praying really hard to get to Confession in time. At my parish, confessions are before Mass, giving the priest just enough time to finish and prepare for Mass. We try to respect the posted times in order to give him that time because of course, at some point he has to dart out of the confessional!

I got to the church with only 15 minutes left of Confession...hoping there was no line.

When I walked into the chapel, though, my heart sank...about 5 people in line ahead of me. It was by then 6:34. And these people were in NO HURRY to make their confessions, apparently. So I prayed and fidgeted, staring at Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, begging to have enough time, begging for the Sacrament. Desperate to be reconciled to Him. Knowing that I might have been too late, and that the potential was that I might have to walk away, denied the Sacrament I needed.

I did not begrudge the people standing in line ahead of me...I assume they were as desperate as I, for NO ONE likes to stand in line waiting for Confession. I think it's part of the penance. It's Pre-Penance.

I just made that up. But that's what it feels like.

Yet, standing there realizing my desperation, I considered what it must be like for those Catholics in places like the Sudan and China and Saudi Arabia, or even ALASKA, where it might be difficult to receive ANY of the sacraments. And it might be impossible to be absolved even once per year! Maybe it's many years, but not out of desire for the Sacrament, but from unavailability.

I realized that, had there not been time tonight, I could come back tomorrow...there would be 3 opportunities. One requiring me to get up much earlier, another requiring me to go to work later, and one requiring me to leave EVEN EARLIER from work in order to get there on time.

I have no right to complain. My desperation doesn't COMPARE with that of Catholics all over the world.

I'm a spoiled brat.

It was a lesson in humility, in remembering the great gift that we have in this country. Even in realizing that in my metro area there are many parishes that have Confession times maybe only once per week, and only for a half hour.

But there was another lesson for me, one that reminded me of something I learned in class a year ago; and that was the lesson learned from the woman with the hemorrhage.

She had been bleeding for 12 YEARS! She was considered to be "impure" because of it. She was shunned, and she was probably very sick and weak. She'd sought cures for those long twelve years, to no avail. The woman was truly desperate. So when Jesus walked by, as the crowds pressed around Him, she sought Him out, maybe even crawling, for the scriptures say she touched the corner of his cloak. It may even have been the tassel of his prayer shawl that would have hung low to the ground, and the part of him that was most "impure" of what He would have worn as a Jew, for it would be close to the ground and dirty. She would not have wanted to cause impurity to Jesus...but she knew she needed Him in order to be healed.

Imagine the ground-level view, as she reached out towards Jesus as He passed her by. Imagine how desperate she was, how weak, how lonely. How outcast.

And how faithful! Consider how she did not want to render Jesus impure because of her own state...she sought only to be healed of her condition, so touched that which was on Him, and was the least "pure" according to the Law.

She touched the tassel...and in that instant, was healed. Jesus stopped and called out, and she came forward, fearful, expecting rebuke, but telling Him everything. Her shame became God's glory...her shame still impacts us over 2,000 years later.

And we see the mercy of Jesus through the desperation of an unknown woman. She gives us the example of the desperation we should ALL have when we receive ANY of the Sacraments, but in our American culture of plenty, even the Sacraments are plentiful. Yet our desperation is lacking.

Ever since that lesson, I've tried to consider, each time I receive Holy Communion, to consider the desperation of that woman, trying to realize what I am doing, Who I am receiving...and if I'm not "desperate" enough, I simply don't realize my wretched condition especially in comparison to the reality of the God who is about to enter under my roof.

Tonight, although I did not attend Mass, I was granted at least a small sense of desperation, truly fearful I would be denied the mercy I needed. And although I usually go behind the screen, I decided that even if I was walking in as Father was leaving, and he saw and recognized me (and I know he would return to the confessional as I was last in line), I would have made my Confession face to face. Because I was that desperate...I didn't care if I was "known in my sin." I needed the Grace of the Sacrament, I needed to meet Jesus face-to-face and touch the tassel on his cloak.

It is desperation that humbles us and makes us realize who we really are and why we need God. It is in our lowest moments that we can most clearly see His face. And it is only when we have hit that point that Jesus can reach down to where we crouch in the dirt and lift us up so He can embrace us.

Tonight was a beautiful lesson for me, one I hope to remember, not only so that I can recall the sense of desperation, but also so as to remember God's incredible Mercy...He did not send me away to suffer any longer.

He let me touch the tassel of his cloak, just as He was passing by.

We should all remember that when we approach Our Lord, we are the woman in the dirt, we are bleeding, we are humiliated...and we all need him as desperately as she did.
*

WORLD DAY OF PRAYER FOR PRIESTS!

Tomorrow, May 30, is BOTH the Feast of the Sacred Heart of Jesus AND the World Day of Prayer for Priests

This is significant, for who is Christ but our High Priest? And who is the Priest at your parish, the one you call "Father", but one chosen by Christ to follow in His steps, who in turn, calls you and teaches you to conform yourself to Christ?

From the website above:

It is timely that we express our appreciation to so many priests who are indeed a daily reflection of Christ's love for his people. We wish to express our love for our priests and provide them with the support and encouragement they deserve. We express great joy in affirming and encouraging our priests as the servants of God's people. We are also encouraging people around the world to stop whatever they are doing at 3pm local time and spend a quiet moment praying in thanksgiving for our priests and contemplating the gift of priesthood.

The priesthood is a gift to us all; it was Padre Pio who observed that the world can survive more easily without the sun than it can without the Mass. And indeed, what happens at Mass? Heaven touches earth. At the behest of whom? God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, through the consecrated hands of the priest.

The world could not survive without the priesthood!

Irony

I used to be terrified of priests. Not because they ever did anything wrong, but because I did. I had a guilty conscience. I had fallen away, and my perception of priests was that they were the holiest of the holy, they'd be able to see right through me, and if they ever met me they'd drag me immediately off to the Confessional to be reconciled to God. Because that was what I needed and I knew it.

But I didn't want to go. God is merciful, though, and through a long winding road, He finally brought me to Confession and made me face who I really was; but more importantly, who He was calling me to be. And I made that 12-year Confession face-to-face to a priest I'll never forget. While I am an affectionate person, I do have a strong sense of boundaries, and after I was absolved, I came very close to throwing my arms around the dear priest who talked me through my distress and revealed to me the true face of Jesus Christ. He had called me the "prodigal daughter" and was overjoyed I'd come Home, finally, and to this day I wish I HAD followed that impulse, for I would have been hugging Christ himself in that joyful moment. I only wish I knew who he was so I could pray for him by name.

I was still terrified of priests for a long time, for it was hard to leave the life I was living; it's aways hard to dig yourself out of pit of your own creation and one the world helps you dig more deeply but has no interest in building steps for escape. But I was serious about wanting to really live a life in Christ, and God did not abandon me and in fact, used His priests in various ways. Since that time, I've come to know the priests at the parish I attend; we've had many as we are a large parish so they send us newly ordained priests for a couple years and then send them onward to be on their own.

Not only have these priests provided me with the Sacraments which I so desperately need, but they've provided me with an example of holiness, encouraged me in trying to be a better human being, and even a Saint (an ongoing joke with one of them...I wore out my "extension", though!). The priests I've known have helped me teach RCIA especially when I began, and remained available for questions as I prepared my talks. Two of them provided me references for two different grad schools, even though they really didn't know me well enough at the time of those letters, but apparently felt that someone seeking to be more Catholic was a good thing! And I was accepted to both schools (so the must have lied for me....) Those same two also provided me with references for my current job (a church), and their references were crucial!

But it goes beyond the Sacraments and Administrative things; these men who have given their lives to Christ really ARE our Fathers. As a woman, maybe it's easier for me to understand the image of the "Bride of Christ" that is the Church, and see truly how these men have given up everything in order to bring Christ to us all! They love children, they love families, and they know they will never have their "own". Yet I have to wonder how often our parish mimics a large family, and how often Father goes home (Fathers plural in our case!) and rubs his temples, willing the headache away, realizing that even adults are his children? And we're WORSE! His work is largely thankless and he goes from a harsh funeral one moment to a joyful parishioner who's been greatly blessed in some way, to a wedding, to hearing Confessions (of even prodigal daughters like myself), to even his own family tragedies. And yet, in all of this, he continues to serve Christ by serving us and leading us.

Every time I say "Father" I mean it. Every time I see a priest, I'm thankful to Christ for calling him and sending him across my path. I'm thankful to the priest who baptized me, who heard my First Confession, gave me my First Communion, and the Bishop who Confirmed me. I'm thakful for all those priests who have ever been there to provide an example, lend an ear, respond to an email, and offer friendship in Christ for a tiny soul seeking to do God's will.


I will be praying hard tomorrow for priests, especially at 3 pm, and I ask you all to join me and the rest of the world in doing so.

Were it not for the priests God has sent across my path, I don't know where I'd be...certainly not where I am now. Pray for priests. Pray for their holiness, their strength in living out their vows, their Fatherhood to us all...and for an increase in many more!

Thank you, Fathers, and maybe you don't hear it enough, so let this resonate with you:

WE LOVE YOU!
And we will NEVER stop praying for you!
*

I'm not a Martyr...tonight

Thank you to everyone who offered prayers and Mass intentions for myself and the parents and First Communicants.

The evening went well. I don't think my speaking ability was great by any means, but a couple mothers approached me afterward and thanked me for stating that they MUST go to Mass. Period.

I'm almost disappointed there wasn't a lynching. Really, it's the only chance I have at Sainthood. Maybe tomorrow. Or next year.

In all seriousness, though, I have to admit that tonight I felt privileged to be able to stand up there and speak for Christ. To tell people about Him. To speak authoritatively about the True Presence of Jesus Christ and back it up with scripture. To tell of stories of the Saints, and of Eucharistic Miracles.

And most of all, to proclaim in this manner my own love for Christ.

It was an honor to speak for Him, an honor I don't deserve, and that Jesus doesn't need. The Lord doesn't NEED us at all. Any of us. But He allows us to participate in His plan of Salvation, and for that, I will forever be grateful.

Tomorrow I'll give the same talk to the second group of parents. Please continue to keep them, and their children in your prayers.

St. Ignatius on the Eucharist

Today I was doing my reading for one of my classes which delves into the Church Fathers, and I found the following quote from St. Ignatius Martyr (ie St. Ignatius of Antioch):

My Love has been crucified and there burns in me no passion for material things. I take no delight in corruptible food or in the dainties of this life. What I want is God's bread, which is the flesh of Christ, who came from David's line; and for drink I want his blood: and immortal love feast indeed!

St. Ignatius Martyr gave us many writings from the time he walked the earth, immediately following the time of the Apostles. He was a direct disciple of St. John the Apostle, and bishop of Antioch after St. Peter.

In another quote, he instructs us on unity in the Church under the hierarchy which was clearly already established:

Be careful, then, to observe a single Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord, Jesus Christ, and one cup of His Blood that makes us one, and one altar, just as thee is one bishop along with the presbytery and the deacons, my fellow slaves.

St. Ignatius was fed to the lions on behalf of Jesus Christ. After his arrest, as he journeyed to Rome, he begged the people to allow him to go to his death, for he noted that to allow this gave greater glory to God; for, "Our God Jesus Christ, indeed, has revealed himself more clearly by returning to the Father." So he also desired to go to the Father, so that he could allow his death to be his final statement as to the truth of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and His presence in the Eucharist.

Cana

This evening I assisted in preparations for tonight's Cana Dinner, enjoying decorating for the annual feast, and thrilled that I'd be able to attend First Friday Mass as usual, even though I was working. Part of what I was there for tonight was to assist the musicians, which meant that I had to sit near them in a side wing pew.

I am quite familar with this particular Gospel message; my regular readers will remember a post I wrote on the Wedding at Cana, based upon a talk I had heard, and then one I gave. But tonight, the message came home to me in a different, very special way.

All afternoon as we decorated, I had a sense of "Cana" that I couldn't shake, but I didn't get a chance to go to the Chapel to consider it for awhile. At Mass, even though I was happy to be there, I felt like the odd one out when I surveyed the church full of married couples. I was the only single woman there, save for a family that was attending the Mass, yet they at least were connected to each other. I had no one. It's not that I felt my presence was not legitimate; it was more a matter of feeling as though I stood out, and couldn't maybe relate properly to the couples who were present for the evening.

Then, during his homily, Father spoke about Theology of the Body, and the way he described it brought it home to me in a way that clarified what God had been trying to convey to me all day.

I was brought face-to-face with my singlehood, while reflecting on the wonderful joy of marriage. Yet I also realized the absence of what Father was describing in my own family, due to my parents having been divorced when I was eight. I realized that I'd never SEEN that beautiful reflection of God through the marriage of my parents, and further, how many other people out there have been deprived of the same thing. I realized the importance of the marital relatioship, and what it tells us about God Himself and His complete love for us.

This reflection saddened me nearly to tears. In fact, several times I had to blink them back, but throughout Mass, my eyes were almost literally shrink-wrapped in tears. I considered the teen musicians and prayed they were paying attention and making the connection with the witness of so many married couples. I realized there was likely a good number of them who ALSO desperately needed to see and understand this wonderful image of God, the foundation of society that has come so under attack.

Yet singlehood continued to be a running theme as I reflected on my presence there that evening. I was there for a reason, and I had indeed contributed to the celebration, in a way that would be unsung, and that gave me joy. I was proud (in a good way!) about what we as a group accomplished to prepare, and that it was truly a spirit of service and hospitality that worked through us all in order to bring a message of the love of Christ to those who would attend.

But I was also struck by the focus on marriage for this event, with the juxtaposition of my presence as an old maid single woman. It was that moment that I recognized my poverty before God, and even as that particular sword went through my heart, there was joy, for God never reveals difficult truths without also revealing His love. And in fact, the two concepts are one and the same.

As a single woman, I have no one else. I have no real "status". I have no one else to lean on; I have only God. If something seperates me from God, I am to blame, for I have no spouse to accuse. Every day, every moment, I can only belong to Christ, and it is my very poverty as a single woman in special need of His grace that brings me to him. And through the recognition of this reality, I also realized my desperation to receive Him in Holy Communion.

Last semester in our Spirituality class, our professor spoke of the desperation we should all have, akin to the desperation of the woman with a hemorrhage who touched Jesus' tassel and was healed. We should all have that desperation, and that faith.

I've also been planning a talk for next Tuesday on the subject of Lent, which partially consists of the topic of spiritual poverty. For it is spiritual poverty that allows us to see God and to know Him. We cannot approach the throne of grace unless we are aware of our poverty.

Tonight, I saw my poverty in a new way, and the recognition brought me to the desperation of knowing I can do nothing at all without Christ. I am completely lost without Him. I am completely alone without Him....because I have no one else.

After Mass, the DRE told me that I had a spot at the table with her, Father, and the speaker, and with the scent of the wonderful dinner awaiting, I thanked her. (And tried not to drool too much!) My stomach was rumbling, and really, I wanted nothing more than to sit down and share the feast with all the fine people present.

But there WAS something I wanted more, and had already received; Jesus. I wanted to be with Him, in silence and prayer, pondering the incredible love he revealed to me tonight. And somehow, the idea of staying for the dinner seemed somehow wrong; I didn't belong there. I was the only single woman in the room. No, no one knew that, but I did, and it didn't feel right to me to be sitting there with such fine company.

I can't really explain that sense of not belonging, but when I went inside and sat down for a moment to tell the DRE and Father that I would not be able to stay, that feeling was confirmed. I had to get away. Certainly I LOVED the company, all wonderful people, but tonight I had to turn down the invitation.

After I left the dinner, mouth watering as I walked past the buffet table, I went into the church for a moment to pray. But it wasn't until I was en route home that the message of Cana came to me.

Normally I like to listen to music while I drive, but tonight, I needed the silence, and in that silence, God spoke to me. I came to understand that tonight, I had a role in the Gospel, and it was a role that applies to me both as a single woman and in my work at the parish.

Tonight, I was the servant.

I could hear Mary's words speaking to me, "Do whatever he tells you." And in my mind's eye, I could see Jesus turn to me and direct us to fill the jars with water. I considered the labor of the day and the purpose of our labor. I considered the doubts that I've had since I began my current work and my grad school studies. What am I doing? Why? What is really happening here?

In the Wedding at Cana, the servants acted out of obedience, not really understanding the task at hand, but doing it anyway. And in the end, it was they, the most humble and insignifant, who had a front row seat to the miracle that took place. The servants knew that the jars were filled with only water, for it was they who worked to hard to make it so, according to the direction they had been given.

But it was the Steward, who knew nothing of the previous events, who encountered the miracle, before the astonished eyes of the servants.

The servants don't get to taste the wine. The servants don't get to sit with the honored guest even to eat the scraps. The servants fade into the background, knowing they were blessed to have had a front row seat.

Tonight, I was a servant, and it would not have been proper for me to stay. It was proper for me to leave. Had I remained, certainly it would have been by invitation and would still have been proper, but had I done so, I would not have understood the lesson God had in mind for me.

This lesson goes far beyond tonight, for it encompasses not only my status as a single woman, but also the integrity of my work, the virtues of obedience, humility, and charity, and the understanding of what it means to be present at the true Wedding Feast of the Lamb, knowing that I am a Bride.

I need nothing more than the Divine love of Christ, nothing more than to know that I have been called to serve Him, nothing more than to recognize my poverty and that alone, nothing can seperate me from the Bridegroom who awaits us all.

Statistics

Does anyone know where I can find the most reliable statistics on Mass-going Catholics, containing a breakdown on what percentage believe in the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist?

I'm preparing for a talk for early February, so any info/links you can provide would be extremely helpful!

"Eucharist"

I have been contemplating this term a great deal recently, both because of the paper I handed in a week ago, and because it grates on my nerves like nails on a chalkboard.

I've been wondering; what is my problem with this word?! "Eucharist" is a completely licit and necessary word of any Catholic's vocabulary. It means "thanksgiving", and indeed, do we not give thanks for the sacrifice of atonement Jesus made for us upon the cross?

Ahh....that's it. Allow me to explain.

At work, as it is my job to coordinate the first sacraments, I have a whole bunch of books labeled "Eucharist". Which is fine. I also have a whole bunch of files I inherited marked "First Eucharist."

I'm cringing just thinking about it.

You may be wondering what my problem is. So did I. Until yesterday when I realized there's a HOST of reasons this phrase grates on my nerves, so I'm going to try to coherently lay it out.

I grew up with the term "Communion". Certainly I heard the word "Eucharist" but "Communion" was the predominant term, especially in my household. And through the use of the word "Communion", or even better, "Holy Communion" I was given to understand that through this sacrament there was a special joining to Jesus Christ.

This completely meshes with the term "Eucharist", of course...it's all over the Catechism of the Catholic Church, after all. You will not find me arguing with that very important and wholly scriptual document! The CCC is my friend!

Perhaps my problem is this; the term "Eucharist" is tossed around and used to mean many things, not all of them holy. I have heard and read of "doing Eucharist" in reference to certain crazy women who have dubbed themselves "priests." I've seen the phrase "We are a Eucharistic People" especially in connection to particular "Catholic Communities" that tend to de-emphasize the holy and fully emphasize what appears to be a political convention in what is SUPPOSED to be, properly, a church.

While the former is completely un-holy, and the later is legitimate, it is still annoying...because all too often the term "Eucharist" in those places emphasizes the "table" where we share the Body and Blood of Christ, and links it to a certain lateral theology, effectively removing the emphasis which SHOULD be upon the Sacrifice of Atonement.

I have no problem with the fact that the Mass is indeed a feast; it must be, for this is the fulfillment of the final Covenant. Jesus is the Lamb of God, and just as the proleptic passage of Exodus discsses the fulfillment of eating the flesh of the lamb, so we follow suit. The Covenant involving the death and resurrection of Jesus is not really fulfilled until we CONSUME the flesh of the Lamb. Thus, the theology involving the Paschal Feast is indeed proper. The term "Eucharist" used in connection with this is fine, but it's gotten out of control.

Because of the over-usage of the term "Eucharist" and "Eucharistic", it seems tjat the people of God have really been done a HUGE disservice. I keep seen statistics that cite only a small percentage of Catholics actually believe in the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. But a whole lot of people sure do show up and labor for open Communion. And it's so ironic that in that context the term "Communion" is used, because these same people use the term "Eucharist" almost exclusively except when discussing ecumenism. And suddnenly it's not about going to dinner, but rather about being hospitable to people who don't share Catholic beliefs. But then again, I suppose I can understand the confusion...if Catholics don't believe in the True Presence in the Eucharist, why WOULD they have a problem with sharing what they only perceive to be a symbol? In effect, many Catholics have Protestant beliefs, and they have these beliefs due to very poor catechesis.

Some non-Catholic denominations use the term "Eucharist" also, and this may also lend to the poor catechesis in Catholic circles. I can say no more about this because I simply do not have any factual information on those differing beliefs; suffice to say they do not believe what we as Catholics believe.

In any case, when I hear the term "First Eucharist" I think I'm cringing because I envision a program that denies proper catechesis, placing the emphasis on the wrong things, or at the very best, providing an imbalanced catechesis that avoids exactly those things that made people walk away from Jesus in John 6, too.

Lots of people argue that some aren't ready to hear the truth; I will argue that if we who know the truth don't provide it, then we become responsible for not imparting it. It is not up to us to decide what others do or don't feel, or what others will or won't do. If I tell someone, for example, that they must eat the flesh of Jesus Christ, and that Holy Communion is the consummation of the Paschal Wedding Feast and they walk away (after providing much more explanation), well, I'm not responsible. They are walking away from Jesus, not from me.

Am I suggesting that information should be presented without due care? No! Far from it! However, I will not withhold information because I fear a Catholic might walk away because they are "grossed out" by theology. It simply means I will be careful to preface anything "scary" with proper education. And still, people might walk away. That's between them and God; they cannot come to know God if they are not provided the education that enables them to accept or reject him. Ignorance is NOT bliss.

So, after all this rambling, I will say I prefer the term "Holy Communion." Because that's what it is; pure and simple.

The emphasis on the "table" is misguided, although understandable. For the Holy Eucharist" was establised at the Last Supper, a Passover meal. But doesn't that say something? It was about consuming the flesh of the lamb...and on that night, the Lamb of God explained that the bread was His flesh, the wine was His blood. This meal component of Holy Communion is EXTREMELY important. However, the Last Supper setting was actually NOT the Mass itself, and it was not the Covenant. It was, in fact, pointing to something greater, something far more important, and it was a link!

The Last Supper was proleptic of the Sacrifice of the Cross. "Proleptic" is something that is indicative of a future reality. For example, Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament is proleptic of the Beautific vision.

So the Last Supper is not, in fact, the sacrifice of the Mass, but it contains a very important component, for, as I stated, the flesh of the Lamb must be consumed...and we do that. AFTER the consecration.

The Eucharist itself, Holy Communion, is the Sacrifice of Atonement. The Consecration is the death of Jesus upon the cross. It makes the sacrifice at Calvary present; when we kneel in that moment, we are kneeling at the very foot of the cross. The Mass is a SACRIFICE; it is an act of PENANCE, it is an act of REPARATION, it is an act of REDEMPTION for us all! And we CONSUMMATE this act by eating of the fruit of this cross, the flesh and blood of Christ Himself.

And that is why it is a Eucharistic meal; for if we aren't giving thanks to Christ for what He did to redeem us, we shouldn't be receiving at all. If we think that this is a hoe-down barn-raising meal to be shared with all comers and don't understand that this very FLESH of GOD came to us out of a horrible sacrifice that WE inflicted upon Him so viciously...we shouldn't be receiving.

So as I teach others, I will use the preferred term "Holy Communion" in my catechesis; and I will be using the term "Eucharist" very sparingly. Not because it's wrong, but rather, because people don't understand the theological implications of this reality. And when terms are not understood, they get redefined by whatever human disorder makes the word "feel good."

When we receive Holy Communion, we are offering ourselves to Him, we are accepting His sacrifice of atonement on our behalf, and we are agreeing to follow Him...even unto death. We are agreeing as a people to be His Bride; we are, in fact, in a very deep communion in joing our flesh to His in this very holy act. We should indeed be giving thanks! The word "Communion" is indicative of our desire to join our wills to that of the Lord, to follow Him wherever He leads, agreeing that in fact, we believe heart and soul all that the Church teaches. This is COMMUNION. And the fact that this communion is in relation to the standard of holiness, God himself, that makes it "Holy Communion."

However, if our "Eucharist" is divorced from sacrifice and repentance...then our "Eucharist" is nothing more than a word. And words are cheap.