My oldest daughter will be making her first communion this spring. What our pastor told us, at the parent meeting, is that one knows their child is ready to receive holy communion when they know that what they are receiving is not bread and wine, but the body and blood of Jesus. I think that's what is meant by the word, understanding.

Stuart,
I think there is more to it than mindless legalism. First of all, canon law regulates how and when a child may receive first communion. Secondly, I think that the parents are only nominally Catholic comes into play here. As we know, the holy mysteries are not magic. Sometimes it is better to put off receiving a sacrament until a better time (when the family has embraced their faith more fully).
There is a balance here, between these things and economy. I really think that we aren't getting the full story. The media often doesn't report everything, only what will put the church in a bad light. Maybe this priest is wholly in the wrong. But I don't know if we can really make that determination based on this news story.

Going back to this English child for a minute - I was at a friend's this afternoon who asked me if I had seen the mother and child on the TV this morning - I hadn't.

I think there is more than just the child's mental capacity at stake here - and I'm sorry that the Parish Priest is now going to be the 'bad man' .

Whilst the mother was speaking [ I'm told the whole interview lasted only a few minutes ] the child was waving at the camera men with one hand and then making a 'V' sign at them with the other . When his mother tried to control this he snatched his hand away from her , turned round and 'mooned ' at the cameras.

Maybe this type of behaviour is why the Mother can't take him to Mass and get him to sit through the whole Service .

I fully expect that the Diocese has a programme of education for people with special needs - I wonder if the parents have decided not to involve their child in this .

We don't know - we do not have all the facts and we never will.

Dear Danman,

I stick with Father Taft on this one. Latin practice is an innovation with no theological foundation, kept in place by post hoc rationalization and the force of inertia. In fact, as Taft pointed out, the current Latin practice (as opposed to its canon law) stands in opposition to 1200 years of the Tradition of the Chruch in the West. There is no such thing as a "minimum age" at which a child may receive the Eucharist. But there is a maximum age at which he falls under the Latin precept that one must receive communion and go to confession at least once a year. Vatican II sought to restore the integrity of the rites of initiation and the practice of the ancient Church. Other than creating RCIA, this is one area in which the Church has utterly failed to follow the directives of the Council.

Don't get me started on this issue ...

The Byzantine Catholic Churches are not practicing their rite in many cases either.

I have been a parishioner of 2 Byzantine Catholic churches who practice "First Communion Rules" especially when it comes to my son (or so it seems).

I strongly disagree with this practice - but I am obedient to my priest who won't chrismate my child until Easter or Thomas Sunday. I don't understand this nor do I agree with it but I have not even discussed it with my current priest because it was a great source of frustration and misunderstanding with my last priest and the main reason I left his church. I don't want to leave another church over this issue so I've given up on pressing the issue and pressing forward for the rights of my child.

I'm tired of arguing to get my child to receive The Holy Mysteries which I believe is his heritage and right to receive NOW.

I'm sorry but the Byzantine Catholic Churches are not up to speed on this - much in the same way that Priests are not married in most of the Byz Cath world. Why NOT? I applaud the Ukrainian Rite and the Melkites for allowing married men into the priesthood. It's natural and Byzantine to do this.

I have 2 major problems with this
1. Are we not in communion with the Holy See?
so who cares about waiting? why are we so latinized in these areas? If you change rites - are there rules in place for the newly converted or something? - you need to wait because you changed rites?

2. Are we not to practice the orthodoxy of our Byzantine Rite as orthodoxyly as possible? (see orientale lumen) The last time I checked - there is no waiting period in the Eastern Orthodox Church.

Eastern Orthodoxy is right on these items - give the kids the Eacharist as soon as they are baptised and as soon as possible and as soon as they are recognized as members of the church and allow married men to become priests (unless you think celebate men are somehow more worthy or endowed to be priests) I thought the Holy spirit was the one that works through the man - and not the other way around.

In my case - why has it taked years after a change of rite to have my child recognized as a Byzantine Catholic boy and to be Chrismated and receive the Holy Mysteries he deserves.

No wonder our churches are struggling to grow their ranks - and why many just give up and go back to the Latin Churches (or elsewhere)

I'm a patient - stubborn Serbian man - and yes I've been told by Byzantine Catholics that I should leave the church and go be with my Serbian Orthodox people. How's that for evangelization?

I may ask my Bishop for permission to attend Serbian Orthodox services if things don't change soon.

Perhaps that is where I belong. Then I can argue with other Serbians - something we seem to be very good at.

My brother and friend, John, speaks from the heart about the circumstances that he himself has had to live through and I, for one, can't find any disagreement with what he's said.

As regards the young boy in the UK, I agree with Anhelyna that we've not likely had the full story and likely won't know it ever. As danman has said, the apparent nominal Catholicism of the family may well be a factor in the situation. However, were the Latin Church to revisit the praxis of infant communion, this issue would not be an issue. With that unlikely to happen anytime soon, we'll continue to read stories like this from time to time (we had a similar thread some years ago, I believe) and, at the same time, we'll also see spiritually edifying stories in which a very different pastoral approach was taken.

Though we may be conflicted, even within our own ranks, as to which was the better approach, it's not our battle - we do have our own windmills against which to joust.

Many years,

Neil

I apologize for my rants from time to time.

I think I just need to vent my frustration.

I think I'm in good company though ... Alexander Schmemann used to criticize the Russian Orthodox all the time - and he was devout to the end.

I'm no Schmemann (not even close) but it does help to vent on these forums and to see what great christians there are in the world ...

I will strive to be like you fellow and holy brethren - calm, peaceful, at peace, accepting.

John

Canon 694 - According to the tradition of the Eastern Churches, chrismation with holy myron is administered by a presbyter either in conjunction with baptism or separately.

Canon 695 - §1. Chrismation with holy myron must be administered in conjunction with baptism, except in a case of true necessity, in which case, however, it is to be seen that it is administered as soon as possible.


I don't know for certain if the cceo are our canons or not.

The other question is what is true necessity? in my case I feel it strongly - is that true necessity?

I have not found anything in the canon laws that describe a "waiting period" for those baptised and transferred properly.

True necessity would be a situation in which baptism in the Byzantine rite would not be possible for an extended period, or when death is a serious possibility, in which case the child could be baptized by a priest of the Latin or any other rite, or even by a deacon or layman, according to the Trinitarian formula. But as soon as possible thereafter, the person should be Chrismated, whether infant or adult.

Usually, when a person already baptized by not confirmed/chrismated is received into a new particular Eastern Catholic (or Orthodox) Church, then Chrismation is performed immediately, or as soon as is practical after the reception is approved.

By the way, if you can't get any satisfaction, fear not--Serbian chant is wonderful.

Just a brief note. I have a 7-year old daughter with Down Syndrome. She has grown up in two EC parishes, one Ruthenian and the other Russian Greek-Catholic. She has been communing since her baptism as an infant, with no significant problems.

In fact, a few months ago, one Sunday after receiving communion, she whispered to me, totally out of the blue, "I ate some Jesus!!". Now, we have of course taught her that Jesus is there in the Eucharist, but never taught her to speak of it in terms of "eating some Jesus" - she worked that out on her own.

There is no question in my mind that she has the benefited immensely from the grace of the Eucharist, no how matter how little she may understand it. It has often been a point of meditation for me - that compared to the depth of the Mystery, my understanding is really not that much greater than hers.

I of course disagree with the current Latin practice of ex-communicating children, that, as Stuart has pointed out, is a medieval innovation and departure from ancient tradition both East and West.

In the case of the UK boy, it seems that the family is only nominally Catholic. Even given that, I don't see why he should be denied communion, as long as he is physically able to receive. If he has trouble sitting through a one-hour Mass, I think this may have more to do with the fact that he is not accustomed to being in church if they only go a couple times month. My daughter has no problem with a 1 1/2 hour DL. Especially at the Russian parish, which has no pews: she is free to move around, look at icons, sit on the floor and read a book, etc....

God Bless you and your daughter Keith