Thursday, July 16, 2015

The Lords Supper

I had an experience at Mass this morning that made me think of a blog I made here a while ago.  I touched it up, and here it is.


Something happened which reminded me of the tremendous reverence we ought to approach the Lords Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity with.

The Eucharist should always be a blessing, never a curse.

Lord have mercy!



Admittance to the Sacrament of Sacraments, the Most Holy and Divine Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ

I am writing this to either educate or re-educate my fellow Catholic brothers and sisters in Christ about the requirements for admittance to the Supper of the Lord, the Most Holy and Divine Sacred Mystery, that Sacrament of Sacraments we call the Eucharist or Holy Communion.

I have spoken with several Catholics who do not know the five prerequisites for admittance to the Supper of the Lord.  You MUST meet all five, or you should not come forward to receive. 
I have seen that some Catholics either do not care about the requirements or do not know them, but I have a duty as a Catholic to admonish and teach my brothers and sisters.  So without further delay, here are the five requirements, with proof from the Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, expounded through the Magisterium in the Code of Canon Law (CIC) and Catholic Catechism (CCC):

#1) You MUST be in a state of grace.   “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.  Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.  (1 Cor. 11:27–29). This is a non-negotiable requirement. If you take the Eucharist while being conscious of mortal sin, you are not eating and drinking forgiveness of sins, blessing and eternal life to yourself.  No, on the contrary, you are eating and drinking damnation, and committing the sin of sacrilege.  God forbid my brothers and sisters!

Please, do NOT think people around you will judge you if you do not go forward.  I guarantee, people will respect a penitent more than somebody taking the Body of Blood of Christ in a wanton manner.  An early Christian teaching document, the Didache, which was written between 50 and 100 A.D., states: "Whosoever is holy [i.e., in a state of sanctifying grace], let him approach. Whosoever is not, let him repent" (Didache 10).

The second part of #1, is you must have been to confession since your last mortal sin.  The Catholic Code of Canon Law states: "A person who is conscious of a grave sin is not to . . . receive the body of the Lord without prior sacramental confession unless a grave reason is present and there is no opportunity of confessing; in this case the person is to be mindful of the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible" (CIC 916).

And again from the Didache: "But first make confession of your faults, so that your sacrifice may be a pure one" (Didache 14).

This requirement (#1 A/B) can be dispensed of for several reasons, including:  (1) there must be a grave reason to receive Communion (for example, danger of death), (2) it must be physically or morally impossible to go to confession first, (3) the person must already be in a state of grace through perfect contrition, and (4) he must resolve to go to confession as soon as possible.

#2) You must believe in the established Dogmas of the Church, most especially (and obviously) the Eucharistic dogmas:  Transubstantiation, and Real Presence.  "For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself" (1 Cor. 11:29).  If you do not believe in the Real Presence, if you do not believe the Lords Words "my flesh is real food, my blood real drink", if you only believe in "symbolic presence" - do NOT approach!  You must ascent to the Catholic dogma or risk not discerning the Precious Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our dearly beloved Lord Jesus Christ.
These are essential Dogmas.  If you deny the Transubstantiation, you are in a state of sin due to heterodox belief.  This is different from having doubts or feeling like you’re not really sure if the bread and wine completely change substance.  This means outright denial of it.  Saying “I have a hard time believing it, but I do believe”, is much different from “I do not believe it”.  Many Bishops and Priests, even Popes and Saints have had a hard time understanding the Real Presence, but they did not deny it.

#3) You must have observed the minimum Eucharistic Fast:  "One who is to receive the most Holy Eucharist is to abstain from any food or drink, with the exception only of water and medicine, for at least the period of one hour before Holy Communion" (CIC 919 §1). Elderly folks, people who are very ill, and their caretakers are excused from the Eucharistic fast (CIC 191 §3). Priests and deacons may not dispense one obligated by the Eucharistic fast unless the bishop has expressly granted such power to them (cf. CIC 89).  Drinking water is allowed, and medicine that is necessary to take is allowed also.  Don’t get scrupulous – I have seen people ask if brushing their teeth breaks the Eucharistic fast…

#4) You must not be under any sort of ban, censure, or excommunication.  "Those who are excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion" (CIC 915).

#5) The final requirement, and the most obvious one:  You must be a validly baptized Catholic.  If you do not have a valid Catholic baptism, do NOT approach for Communion in a Catholic Church.
(CIC 912) Any baptized person not prohibited by law can and must be admitted to holy communion.

In summary, in order to approach the Lords Table, you must be a baptized Catholic, in a state of grace and made recent confession since your past mortal sin, have a correct belief / faith in the dogmas of the Church, particularly the Transubstantiation  / Real Presence.  One must be in good standing with the Church - not under any sort of ban, censure, or excommunication, and finally, have observed the minimum one hour Eucharistic fast.

Dear brothers and sisters, keeping the Most Holy Sacrament Holy is of the utmost importance.  Please make an inventory of yourself before Communion. 

Wednesday, July 15, 2015

Musings on "hell" in modern translations

One hell of an issue?

Fellow Catholics, and all Christians, I have something to show you.  When someone talks about “the pits of hell”, “burning in hell”, or being cast into “hell”, what does this evoke in you?  If you are a Catholic, it should invoke a sense of dread.  If you’re an atheist it should conjure up images of demons boiling poor souls in oil (or worse).  My point being that hell is a pungent word in English.  Hell SOUNDS bad.  Hell sounds like a place you’d want to avoid.
Now what about if I said “go to Sheol!” or “rot in Sheol” or “the pits of hades”, or “burning in Gehenna” or “chained up in Tartarus”.  Not so much reaction right?
Well I just compiled a list of ten Bibles, both Catholic and Protestant, to show you the difference in use of “hell”.  I am ashamed to see that my Churches main American Bible contains the word a total of…. Zero times.

From least to most times:
10) NABRE - 0.
9) NRSV - 13
8) RSVCE - 13
7) NASB - 13
6) NIV - 13
5) AMP, Amplified Bible - 13
4) ESV - 14
3) NKJV - 32
2) KJV- 54
1) Douay-Rheims – 110
This saddens me.  For 433 years we Catholics have had an English Bible that mentioned hell a WHOPPING number of 110 times.  More than twice as much as the KJV.  Now, a lot of these are mistranslations in a way, because in the OT Sheol is not rendered properly into hell.  But that is for another time to discuss translation methodology. 
I also want to make note that 5 of the 10 agree on using hell in 13 places and I am going to argue that our modern Catholic Bibles (and preferably the 2025 update of the NAB Bible) will use hell in those thirteen places and not just transcribe Greek words.  I understand it is truer to the underlying text, but again, “hades” or “Gehenna” just does not evoke the same reaction of the listener/reader as does “hell”
Some of these thirteen places where hell ought to be used include: 
Luke 12:5 But I will warn you whom to fear: fear him who, after he has killed, has power to cast into hell; yes, I tell you, fear him!
 Now what evokes more thought in Jesus words here?  This rendition of being cast into hell….or the NABRE where they transcribe the Greek Gehenna.
Do most American Catholics understand what Gehenna is?  Are many, besides some scholars, clergy, religious and learned laity really fearful of Gehenna?  They do not even know what it is.  However, tell average Joe Catholic he can be cast into hell… and that changes things.
Now next we have 2 Peter 2:4 “For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment”
Okay, I’m sure most would understand these fallen angels are being kept in agony in hell.  But what about our NAB?  In our NABRE, they are in Tartarus.  Now again, granted, Tartarus is the Greek word St. Peter used to describe this in the 1st century A.D., but in the 1st century A.D. Greek speaking Christians would fully understand what Tartarus was.  In A.D. 2015 in America, how many American Catholics can tell you what Tartarus is?  And I know there is a footnote explaining it, but it should be the opposite way: hell in the text, footnote explaining Tartarus and the meaning of the word.

Matthew 23:33 “You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?”
Whoa.  Powerful words from Jesus!
Now here’s the NABRE version:
“You serpents, you brood of vipers, how can you flee from the judgment of Gehenna?”
Now which one makes even a learned person who knows what Gehenna is take these words a little more solemnly?
One last example that is not in any of the Protestant based translations, but is only found in the DR Bible, that should be in ALL Catholic Bibles of course is:
Matthew 16:18 “And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

In closing, I am not saying we ought to go back to the Douay way of doing things and translate hell a whopping 110 times, however, I think going in the opposite direction and leaving hell completely out of the Bible is not a good thing to do.  We need temperance with this issue, as with all things in life.  I believe a perfect NAB for 2025 would have “hell” instead of the transcribed Greek “Hades/Gehenna/Tartarus” in all 13 places where all the other Bibles do, and also in Matthew 16:18.

Feedback is welcome and I appreciate your time.

Sincerely yours in Christ,
Jason Michael Spyridon