1.
“Frequent Communion is bad for you.”
This
statement must be qualified. While the point of our lives as Christians is to
enter into and grow in our common union—“communion”—with God and with His
People, the reception of Holy Communion should not be approached casually. St.
John Chrysostom tells us that, while the Eucharist is indeed the fountain of
new life, it can also be for those who receive it casually or without proper
preparation a fire which can condemn us. Hence, such a statement must be
understood in light of the spirit in which the statement is made: that the
reception of Holy Communion without proper preparation—without repentance,
without a genuine desire to turn our lives around, without seeking God’s
forgiveness, without prayer and reflection on the course of our lives—can
indeed be spiritually harmful and can, as St. John Chrysostom asserts,
ultimately condemn us. It is not “frequent Communion” per se that is “bad” for
us but, rather, receiving Communion without appropriate preparation and
repentance that is “bad” for us. There are many instances in which people
receive Communion frequently without proper preparation simply because, in many
places especially in North America, everyone is expected to commune at every Liturgy.
While St. John Chrysostom once complained “that the sacrifice is offered, yet
no one approaches the Lord’s table,” one must approach the chalice “in faith
and love,” with humility, in a spirit of repentance, and without holding
grudges or anger against others. Scripture itself reminds us that, if we have
something against our brother, we should leave our gift at the altar, seek
reconciliation with our brother, and then return to offer our gift (see Mt
5:23). Here we are clearly reminded of the importance of proper preparation for
the reception of Communion.
2. “There
is no one here that can hear your Confession in English and you do not speak
enough of our language to confess your sins. No Confession—No Communion.”
On the
one hand, one does not have to speak the same language as the confessor in
order to “qualify” to have their Confession heard. Ultimately, it is to God
that we confess our sins; the priest is His witness, as one of the prayers
before Confession clearly states. And, while the Confessor may be limited in
his knowledge of other languages, surely God is not bound by such limitations.
On the other hand, the confessor who would refuse to witness a Confession based
on his inability to understand the penitent errs, inasmuch as he is somehow
defining the quality of one’s repentance by his personal ability to understand
what the penitent is saying. Such is not the case.
What is
more essential here is the understanding held in many places that one may not
receive Holy Communion unless one has made an individual Confession prior to
every reception of Communion. For many years, this was somewhat “standard”
practice, primarily during the centuries when frequent reception of the
Eucharist was unheard of. [There are many reasons, too many to recount in an
email, that led to the infrequent reception of Communion—and as you have
perhaps noted above, already in the time of St. John Chrysostom one finds that
frequent reception of the Eucharist was not necessarily observed.] Until quite
recently—I would say prior to the 1960s—it was common to find the faithful
receiving the Eucharist only once every year, usually during Great Lent.
Certainly, if one receives the Eucharist only once or twice every year, one
should indeed observe individual Confession before receiving Holy Communion. As
the frequent reception of Communion became more commonplace, especially in the
Orthodox Church in America, the understanding of Confession and Communion as
two separate sacraments began to become clearer, to the point that the Holy
Synod of Bishops noted, in a lengthy report issued in the early 1970s, that it
is not necessary to observe individual Confession every time one receives the
Eucharist, provided one is communing regularly, is attentive to the guidance of
his or her Spiritual Father, and is properly prepared through prayer and
fasting to receive the Eucharist.
While
this is generally the understanding in most OCA parishes today, it is not
necessarily the understanding in Orthodox Churches abroad, where the practice
of frequent reception of the Eucharist has yet to become a reality. Painful as
what you have experienced here in terms of language and the like, one must
humbly acknowledge that the level of Church life found in many parishes in
North America is somewhat different than that found elsewhere—again for a wide
variety of reasons—and that one should humbly respect the “wheres” and “whys”
of the Church which one is visiting.
3. “You
ate meat with us last night so you can not receive the Mysteries today.”
I have
encountered this before, even from priests who have eaten with laypersons on
the eve of the Liturgy, yet who themselves commune while chastizing the laity
with whom they ate and drank the night before for doing likewise. The spirit of
this regulation is, again, found in appropriate preparation for the Eucharist:
One should not “party” the night before the reception of the Eucharist. Of
course, if one has “partied hard” on the eve of the Liturgy, one should refrain
from receiving the Eucharist; however, if one simply shared a normal Saturday
evening meal, this should be no obstacle. Everyone does not understand the
“spirit” of the regulation, which also must be humbly acknowledged without
passing judgment, which can lead some individuals to feel that eating, even for
the purpose of sustainence, is not permitted. Also, there are bound to be those
to take the regulation which states that nothing should be taken by mouth from
midnight the night before one receives the Eucharist to the N-th degree as
well, thereby barring anything from being taken by mouth, not just from
midnight, but for a longer period. It is only my opinion, but if one is given
to associating with individuals who believe that eating on the eve of the
Eucharist—without partying and drinking and carrousing in any way—is an
obstacle to the reception of the Eucharist, one should avoid eating with such
individuals, opting to eat alone or to eat with those who do not take the
spirit out of the law, so to speak.
4. “You
have not been fasting for the past three days.”
In many
places, there is a custom of fasting for three days or even a full week prior
to the reception of the Eucharist. This is not a universal custom among all
Orthodox Christians, and there seems to be a variety of explanations as to why
this custom has taken hold in some places. While this is not the custom among
perhaps the majority of faithful within the OCA, it is a long-time, ingrained
custom elsewhere. What is unfortunate is that generally the focus here is
neither on repentance, nor on changing our lives, nor on seeking forgiveness or
reconciliation or a common union with God or His People but, rather, on
fulfilling a regulation or “obligation” to fast for three days—period. It is my
opinion, however, that if this is the custom in the place where one is, one
should again humbly and quietly follow it, rather than create further
discomfort or scandal.
I, like
you, have traveled to traditionally Orthodoxy countries on many occasions, and
I, like you, have also witnessed such attitudes. I would say, however, that the
return to the Lord’s Table will occur in God’s good time, rather than in ours.
In
Russia, for example, one is likely to find the precise attitudes you have
encountered above, even though one of the most revered saints at the present
time, Saint John of Kronstadt, was an advocate of frequent Communion—with
proper preparation, however. Icons of Saint John invariably acknowledge this,
as he is generally depicted holding a chalice in his left hand while pointing
to its opening with his right, in a gesture of invitation to commune. But one
must keep in mind that, between the time Saint John passed away at the
beginning of the 20th century and the time that the Church was free from
communist persecution some 80 years later, a lot had happened that pushed back
the process considerably. Hence, if you consider the attitudes you have
encountered in light of the society and setting in which they are being held,
you should come to a greater appreciation of why such attitudes have developed
and continue to be perpetuated.
While you
did not mention the country you visit often, and while I may be wrong to assume
that it is a formerly communist country, I think that the same principles could
be applied, even if you are speaking of traditionally Orthodox lands that did
not have to endure persecution and repression under the communist regimes of
the past.
5. "Why infants partake of the Holy Communion in the Orthodox Church?"
This is actually the most ancient practice for all the apostolic of East and West. It seems well established that infant baptism was an apostolic ordinance (as indicated by Origen). The mystery or sacrament of initiated included not only baptism (by triple immersion) but also chrismation and the reception of the Eucharist. Hence, one is either in the Church and in Christ or not – there is no partial or fragmentary participation in the Church.
This is actually the most ancient practice for all the apostolic of East and West. It seems well established that infant baptism was an apostolic ordinance (as indicated by Origen). The mystery or sacrament of initiated included not only baptism (by triple immersion) but also chrismation and the reception of the Eucharist. Hence, one is either in the Church and in Christ or not – there is no partial or fragmentary participation in the Church.
Source: https://oca.org/questions/divineliturgy/communion-questions;
https://www.orthodoxanswers.org/why-do-infants-receive-holy-communion-in-the-orthodox-church/
CONVERSATION