typical penances

[AMDG]

Catholics are not to take Communion after a divorce either until they reconcile the whole thing through the Church.

Just to clarify: divorce does not make a Catholic ineligible to receive Communion (some do think it does). And as always, the healing Sacrament of Confession is open to him or her.

 

[DD2008]

Just to clarify: divorce does not make a Catholic ineligible to receive Communion (some do think it does). And as always, the healing Sacrament of Confession is open to him or her.

I'm divorced and remarried. Just to clarify. It's ok to receive communion if you're divorced and alone, but not ok to receive it if you remarry before you have an anullment of your previous marriage right?

I'm in a situation where I'm civily divorced, but unanulled in the Church, and civily remarried.

I haven't received communion since 2005. I miss it very much.

 

[AMDG]

I'm in a situation where I'm civily divorced, but unanulled in the Church, and civily remarried.

Just answering a question, not trying to derail thread--you answered your own question when you say that you got married without the benefit of a Decree of Nullity (anullment). IOW first marriage is valid. The Church does not teach "remarriage after divorce" and "civil" is not the Church's realm. (After an investigation, and if granted, a Decree of Nullity would declare first marriage invalid because of an existing impediment--so marriage, not re-marriage, would then be possible.) Communion is just that--"union with what the Church teaches". See your priest to help you untangle your problems.

 

[DD2008]

Just answering a question, not trying to derail thread--you answered your own question when you say that you got married without the benefit of a Decree of Nullity (anullment). IOW first marriage is valid. The Church does not teach "remarriage after divorce" and "civil" is not the Church's realm. (After an investigation, and if granted, a Decree of Nullity would declare first marriage invalid because of an existing impediment--so marriage, not re-marriage, would then be possible.) Communion is just that--"union with what the Church teaches". See your priest to help you untangle your problems.

Thanks. Just curious. It sounded to me initially that you had said people in that condition could recieve communion after confession so I was curious as to where you received your info.

In returning to the thread, I don't think I have heard of anyone being denied communion as a penance. That's a new one for me.

 

[benedictaoo]

Just to clarify: divorce does not make a Catholic ineligible to receive Communion (some do think it does). And as always, the healing Sacrament of Confession is open to him or her.

Provided they stay chaste and not remarry with out an annulment and they honestly seek a annulment if the marriage truly was not sacramental.

I was talking to a person yesterday and he made a great point about these Catholics who marry after a divorce and then go for the annulment after the fact instead of before the fact.

Me and this man, we can not understand why these priests are standing for this in their parishes.

We know one man who is divorced and he "re married" right way by a judge and has this women on the alter in Church with him playing music and is trying to get his second annulment from his wife of 25 years.

Why didn't he get the annulment first and then marry the women? Why do ppl think this is okay and acceptable? It's not. and the fact that the priest says, "as long as you try to get that annulment, it's okay..." no. it's not.

I'm contemplating on reporting this parish to the bishop if I go to Mass today and he and this women is sitting on the alter, playing music still, after I pointed out to the priest that he "married" this women right after his divorce and he only knew the women a few weeks.

But what this other man said was, and he made a great point, you can't walk into the priest's office for marriage preparation and let the priest know, "hey we are going to be living toghther in sin before the actual wedding..." The preist would not even marry you.

So why is it okay for divorcees to do the same? iiiit's not.

 

[benedictaoo]

Thanks. Just curious. It sounded to me initially that you had said people in that condition could recieve communion after confession so I was curious as to where you received your info.

In returning to the thread, I don't think I have heard of anyone being denied communion as a penance. That's a new one for me.

IF they are not currently in a sinful situation, like "remarriage" with out the benefit of an annulment (a honest one) and a proper marriage in the Church.

 

[benedictaoo]

You're right in your understanding of it. That's pretty much how we view it. It's not meant to be a punishment, but its seen as protecting your soul because you would hurt yourself more if you were receiving when you weren't spiritually ready. Also, if you were under penance, you would also be under spiritual direction, it's not like the priest says "get lost for a year and come back when you're more pious"

Yeah, I get it and I do not necessarily disagree but there is the other side of that argument that we can't battle the sin with out the grace that comes from the Eucharist and I agree with that as well.

So it goes back to, what constitutes a sin being mortal, which is intent vrs weakness or ignorance. So it's not harming to take communion if there is no mortal sin involved. But with that said, i do think priest and penitents abuse this understanding and some folks who are in a state of habitual sin should reframe becuase we can so easily trick ourselves into thinking it's weakness when it's just willful attachment.

That's when we then need counseling from our confessors and this is something we really do not have easily available in the Latin rite so we instead, confess the sin and bam, do it again and then we confess the sin and bam, we do it again. This is bad IMO becuase it leads to us being discouraged and leads us into despair.

 

[AMDG]

Before the "loosening" that happened in the sixties, it was considered that if you went to receive in Communion, you had been to Confession first (there wasn't everybody lock-step surging toward the altar to receive Communion no matter what.) And if the neighbor refrained at Communion time, well we were urged to think that there might be valid reasons (like inadvertantly breaking the Communion fast or previous reception of Communion that day). IOW when someone refrained from reception of Communion, it wasn't viewed like it is today.

And yes, I have heard (back in those days) of someone once being refused absolution in Confession (necessary for the reception of Communion each time). Haven't heard of it nowadays. I guess that incomplete sorrow for the hurting God and neighbor (sin) is reason enough for absolution.

 

[zhilan]

Yeah, I get it and I do not necessarily disagree but there is the other side of that argument that we can't battle the sin with out the grace that comes from the Eucharist and I agree with that as well.

So it goes back to, what constitutes a sin being mortal, which is intent vrs weakness or ignorance. So it's not harming to take communion if there is no mortal sin involved. But with that said, i do think priest and penitents abuse this understanding and some folks who are in a state of habitual sin should reframe becuase we can so easily trick ourselves into thinking it's weakness when it's just willful attachment.

That's when we then need counseling from our confessors and this is something we really do not have easily available in the Latin rite so we instead, confess the sin and bam, do it again and then we confess the sin and bam, we do it again. This is bad IMO becuase it leads to us being discouraged and leads us into despair.

We don't have mortal/venial sin, but something that came with a penance of not receiving communion would almost certainly fall into the category of what Catholics would see as mortal sin. It's really not meant to be a punishment like a parent grounding their child or anything, it's meant for when the priest determines that receiving communion would be damaging to the person's soul.

 

[benedictaoo]

But here is where I think we Catholics get confused.. if you confess it, you are forgiven and not are in mortal sin anymore?? Correct?

Even if you are imperfectly contrite for your mortal sin, even if you have a disposition of sorrow and you do make a firm purpose of amendment to not sin this way again, you can be forgiven... even though if it's an habitual sin you are dealing with, you need further direction but you are forgiven and you need Communion to strengthen you and give you the grace you need in order to overcome the habit... it's not like that in the EO Church?

if you confess a serious sin, you have to work on it before you can have absolution? Be released from the sin?

 

[zhilan]

But here is where I think we Catholics get confused.. if you confess it, you are forgiven and not are in mortal sin anymore?? Correct?

Even if you are imperfectly contrite for your mortal sin, even if you have a disposition of sorrow and you do make a firm purpose of amendment to not sin this way again, you can be forgiven... even though if it's an habitual sin you are dealing with, you need further direction but you are forgiven and you need Communion to strengthen you and give you the grace you need in order to overcome the habit... it's not like that in the EO Church?

if you confess a serious sin, you have to work on it before you can have absolution? Be released from the sin?

Yes and no. I see your point. Yes, we are forgiven after confession, but it's a little different because we don't have the concept of mortal sin, so there's not a list of things that if you do it you are in mortal sin and need to go to confession. A sin is anything that prevents us from fully living as God the image of God and that harms our spiritual relationship. That's why we we actually ask forgiveness for sins that were involuntary and done in ignorance. I'm not sure, but I think in the Catholic church one cannot sin involuntarily because of the requirements that one must know a sin to be mortal in order to commit it. From our view, we would say that something could be harming your spiritual live even if you don't know it's a sin or you're not doing it on purpose, so in that sense our reasons for going to confession are a little different.

Another thing, and my guess would be this is where our understanding with this comes from, is that in our church confession and communion are -not- supposed to be linked. It's not supposed to be that you go to confession so you can go to communion, they are supposed to be separate sacraments. With that, it makes more sense that one could be absolved of all sins, and still be told that their soul is not ready to receive communion because something in their spiritual life is such that it would be harmful for them. With that said, the reality now days is that the two sacraments are very linked, so much so that I have been to a service where right before communion began a priest (not the one celebrating) came over to hear the confessions of those who were going to receive. I would never be one to say that's right or wrong (in fact it turned out to be very convenient for me as I did need to go to confession), but understanding that historical view of the sacraments I think maybe explain the penance thing.

As a disclaimer though, this is just my speculation (although I think it makes sense) as I never really had that thought until you just brought it up.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

thanks everyone and thanks Zhilan and Rowan for helping me understand the EO view better..

I guess where I'm confused is this..

let's say I committed a terrible sin and I feel really sorry for it, and I go to confession, and it's absolved. The way I understand it, my soul is then clean and I can go and receive the Eucharist. If I have an attachment to a venial sin, a sinful habit, or if I'm sinning involuntarily (Zhilan, to answer your question, this is possible according to Catholic theology, but it would be venial not mortal sin), then I can confess this too and receiving the Eucharist would give me the grace I need to overcome the sinful habit. The only reason I wouldn't be able to receive Communion worthily is if I am not repentant...if I'm repentant yet haven't fully overcome that habit yet, perhaps the Eucharist would help me. So in this way, someone could be a terrible broken sinner yet - still receive the Eucharist worthily as long as they're really repentant and are asking God for the grace to improve..

So in my mind the only way receiving Communion could be harmful to your soul is if you're not repentant, or if you have unconfessed mortal sin, or if you don't have the desire to improve and simply don't care about your sins. As long as you care, no matter how messed up you are, God can use that and 'will not reject a contrite heart'...
based on what I have read in the Saints, whenever someone wanted to abstain from Communion because they felt there was too much wrong with them, their spiritual director would always urge them to receive as long as they've been to Confession and are repentant.

If someone is not at peace with their neighbour and they're about to receive Communion, I think it's a good idea to make peace, or pray for them.. maybe that's why we pray the Lord's prayer before Communion, which includes "forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us". And then we give the sign of peace to each other - maybe for reconciliation as well..

of course if someone is in a state of mortal sin they can't receive Communion, that would be bad for them and downright dangerous spiritually - as St Paul warns.. one could even get sick or die. Yet if someone HAS been to confession and IS repentant..then aren't all the conditions met?

I guess that's why I'm having trouble understanding the EO view..
if someone could help out that would be great. I've understood more of it though from your posts

I don't think you will find a Catholic priest gives out non Communion as a penance to often. I know years ago I reframed from communion volunatrily during a daily Mass and the priest after the Mass asked why I did that, and I said, I think I needed to and he said, NO! we need the grace and strength from Christ to battle the flesh or something to that effect he said.

essentially thats what I'm trying to say too..

btw. someone mentioned counselling - based on what I heard, at my parish there's two 'types' of confession.. you can either be in the confessional, behind a screen, or face to face with the priest. In the confessional, you basically just say all your sins and then are absolved. But in the other type, I heard the priest (my priest at least) talks to you and gives you guidance, and you can even stay there for half an hour if you want. I don't know how it's like in other parishes.

You're right in your understanding of it. That's pretty much how we view it. It's not meant to be a punishment, but its seen as protecting your soul because you would hurt yourself more if you were receiving when you weren't spiritually ready.

I agree about it not being a punishment I guess what I'm confused about though..is, wouldn't you not hurt yourself IF you're repentant? it seems like maybe the EO have more conditions that must be met for Communion, am I right? (or have I misunderstood).. in the Catholic Church, you would only hurt yourself if you're in a state of sin. If you've been to confession, have no mortal sin, and are repentant for all your known and unknown venial sin and want to follow God.. then He comes into your heart in the Eucharist and gives you grace to live better according to His will..and fight your sins...? just trying to figure it out..

Also, if you were under penance, you would also be under spiritual direction, it's not like the priest says "get lost for a year and come back when you're more pious"

God bless

 

[MoNiCa4316]

From our view, we would say that something could be harming your spiritual live even if you don't know it's a sin or you're not doing it on purpose, so in that sense our reasons for going to confession are a little different.

that does make sense.. I guess the Catholic response would be that God really cares about our intentions when we receive Him, and if we have things in our lives that are harming our souls but we're not willing them to be there (or are ignorant), receiving the Eucharist would actually help us.. as long as we're repentant and want to put God first, that is. So it could be said that in Catholicism it's not so much how clean our souls are (in regards to *venial* sin only), or how attached we are to sin, but how repentant and trusting we are.. if we are distrusting of God's mercy, that's a worse sin than any attachment and it hurts God more. If our lives are filled with sin but are totally humble and repentant and have been to confession and are relying on God's mercy, then He is pleased..? This comes from the idea that Christ really *wants* us to receive Him in the Eucharist.

sorry if it seems like i'm just debating you, I'm actually not debating at all but just trying to compare the two approaches

Another thing, and my guess would be this is where our understanding with this comes from, is that in our church confession and communion are -not- supposed to be linked. It's not supposed to be that you go to confession so you can go to communion, they are supposed to be separate sacraments. With that, it makes more sense that one could be absolved of all sins, and still be told that their soul is not ready to receive communion because something in their spiritual life is such that it would be harmful for them. With that said, the reality now days is that the two sacraments are very linked, so much so that I have been to a service where right before communion began a priest (not the one celebrating) came over to hear the confessions of those who were going to receive. I would never be one to say that's right or wrong (in fact it turned out to be very convenient for me as I did need to go to confession), but understanding that historical view of the sacraments I think maybe explain the penance thing.

that's interesting! Actually at my family's parish, it's like this too.. confession is right before Communion, and people go to one in order to go to the other. I've always supposed that this is the Orthodox teaching, but I guess not! Interesting..

I did always have a sense though that the two Sacraments are not THAT much linked in Orthodoxy, because of how you view Confession..

God bless

 

[Rhamiel]

for penances yesterday I was told to say 10 Our Fathers and 10 Hail Mary's

 

[benedictaoo]

wow. what you did, kill someone... J/K but that seems like a lot.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

I think I'll get a huge penance when I go to confession for my lifetime of sin. Maybe I'll be told to wear a hair shirt. (lol just kidding )

 

[benedictaoo]

Yes and no. I see your point. Yes, we are forgiven after confession, but it's a little different because we don't have the concept of mortal sin, so there's not a list of things that if you do it you are in mortal sin and need to go to confession. A sin is anything that prevents us from fully living as God the image of God and that harms our spiritual relationship. That's why we we actually ask forgiveness for sins that were involuntary and done in ignorance. I'm not sure, but I think in the Catholic church one cannot sin involuntarily because of the requirements that one must know a sin to be mortal in order to commit it. From our view, we would say that something could be harming your spiritual live even if you don't know it's a sin or you're not doing it on purpose, so in that sense our reasons for going to confession are a little different.

Another thing, and my guess would be this is where our understanding with this comes from, is that in our church confession and communion are -not- supposed to be linked. It's not supposed to be that you go to confession so you can go to communion, they are supposed to be separate sacraments. With that, it makes more sense that one could be absolved of all sins, and still be told that their soul is not ready to receive communion because something in their spiritual life is such that it would be harmful for them. With that said, the reality now days is that the two sacraments are very linked, so much so that I have been to a service where right before communion began a priest (not the one celebrating) came over to hear the confessions of those who were going to receive. I would never be one to say that's right or wrong (in fact it turned out to be very convenient for me as I did need to go to confession), but understanding that historical view of the sacraments I think maybe explain the penance thing.

As a disclaimer though, this is just my speculation (although I think it makes sense) as I never really had that thought until you just brought it up.

But here is what i don't get.. if there is no mortal sin, ie, a sin that breaks your friendship with God then why do you confess? What is the purpose of the sacrament if it is not to reconcile you back to God when you choose to walk away from Him?

You seem to be saying sins that are harmful to the spiritual life need not only confession but time away from communion becuase we are assuming the person is still attached to the sin and here is where you are losing me, if you confess it, the sin (the actual act) is gone, remembered no more, right? and if we still have a inclination towards the sin, then yes we need to work on it but the sin itself is gone and yes we are to work on the attachment to it but we can't work on it with out Communion, we need Christ. Also penance is issued to atone for the effects, attachment to the sin.

So, I dunno... I honestly don't understand what is a person going to confession for? To be absolved for particular sins or to work on the sin nature? And if you are going to work on the sin nature then you need communion to do that.

Now I can see if a priest hears a person's confession and the person really isn't showing any repentance, then yeah, tell him he can not go to Communion. But that's what priest do too in the Latin rite but it's really if you really show that you aren't sorry.

 

[AMDG]

for penances yesterday I was told to say 10 Our Fathers and 10 Hail Mary's

Those are the kind of penances I'd rather get. But instead I manage to get the "reflect on the readings of today's Mass" or "pray for all the seminarians" or...

 

[MoNiCa4316]

But here is what i don't get.. if there is no mortal sin, ie, a sin that breaks your friendship with God then why do you confess? What is the purpose of the sacrament if it is not to reconcile you back to God when you choose to walk away from Him?

Bene, from my understanding of Orthodoxy, the EO Church teaches that each sin breaks relationship with God, and there's no distinction between mortal/venial sin. (if I'm wrong, someone please correct me)

the Catholic Church teaches that we break friendship with God when we willingly walk away, as you said.

I agree with the rest of your post btw.. that's how I see it too.

 

[benedictaoo]

let's say I committed a terrible sin and I feel really sorry for it, and I go to confession, and it's absolved. The way I understand it, my soul is then clean and I can go and receive the Eucharist. If I have an attachment to a venial sin, a sinful habit, or if I'm sinning involuntarily (Zhilan, to answer your question, this is possible according to Catholic theology, but it would be venial not mortal sin), then I can confess this too and receiving the Eucharist would give me the grace I need to overcome the sinful habit. The only reason I wouldn't be able to receive Communion worthily is if I am not repentant...if I'm repentant yet haven't fully overcome that habit yet, perhaps the Eucharist would help me. So in this way, someone could be a terrible broken sinner yet - still receive the Eucharist worthily as long as they're really repentant and are asking God for the grace to improve..

So in my mind the only way receiving Communion could be harmful to your soul is if you're not repentant, or if you have unconfessed mortal sin, or if you don't have the desire to improve and simply don't care about your sins. As long as you care, no matter how messed up you are, God can use that and 'will not reject a contrite heart'...
based on what I have read in the Saints, whenever someone wanted to abstain from Communion because they felt there was too much wrong with them, their spiritual director would always urge them to receive as long as they've been to Confession and are repentant.

If someone is not at peace with their neighbour and they're about to receive Communion, I think it's a good idea to make peace, or pray for them.. maybe that's why we pray the Lord's prayer before Communion, which includes "forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us". And then we give the sign of peace to each other - maybe for reconciliation as well..

of course if someone is in a state of mortal sin they can't receive Communion, that would be bad for them and downright dangerous spiritually - as St Paul warns.. one could even get sick or die. Yet if someone HAS been to confession and IS repentant..then aren't all the conditions met?

I guess that's why I'm having trouble understanding the EO view..
if someone could help out that would be great. I've understood more of it though from your posts

One important part, you do not have to go to confession if it's venail sin, ie what you described as venial sin. An act of contrition is enough and with reception of the Eucharist, even just assisting at Mass washes you clean again.

These sins hurt us and weaken us and run us down (kind of like having the flu) but they do not break our relationship with God the way mortal sin does. IOW, we are sick but not dying. Mortal sin is, we are not merely sick but we are dying.

So as far as the EO view, I'm trying but I really do not understand.