Case XLIV: Receiving Holy Communion Several Times on the Same Day

Case.—Regina, a pious woman, is so fond of frequent Communion that at times she receives twice, even three times, on the same day, always at different churches of the town. Some people brought this to the attention of Father Evodius, pastor at the church where Regina usually receives Holy Communion first. The priest sends for Regina, warns her that this is not allowed, and threatens to withdraw from her for a certain period the right to receive, unless she discontinues her unlawful action. Regina in reply points out that priests sometimes celebrate Holy Mass more than once, as for instance on Christmas, and that they communicate each time. Evodius then says that the repeated celebration of Holy Mass on one and the same day is under certain circumstances permitted by the Church, and is strictly regulated, but that otherwise a repeated Communion on one and the same day is forbidden by the Church.

Question.—What is to be said about this case?

Solution.—1. In the hard times of persecution the early Christians had a very special need of the “Bread of Angels,” hence they carried it home in order to fortify themselves for the possible martyr’s death; this custom was not discontinued until the fifth century. It may thus have happened that they received in the early morning, during Mass, and again later in the day if threatened with death. Frequent, even daily, Communion was zealously practised in those times, as also daily celebration of Holy Mass. When, however, the Christian religion came under State protection conditions and customs changed.

2. The Holy Eucharist was confided by Christ to His Church, to be administered most reverentially as the sacrifice of the New Law and as the Communion of the faithful. That to this, her supreme Holy of Holies, should be shown due reverence and that it should be administered in a dignified manner is the task of Holy Church, and for this task she makes suitable laws and ordinances. The priests carry out the dignified administration of the Eucharist by conscientiously following the precepts of the Church, and a fruitful reception on the part of the faithful is to be expected if they obediently submit to the guidance of the Church. Any improper conditions must, of course, be rectified by the priest.

3. May Holy Communion be received lawfully more than once on one day? We omit here all reference to the repeated celebration of Holy Mass. Is there an ordinance, a positive law, which prohibits or allows the frequent reception of the Eucharist in Communion on the same day?

Suarez (Disput. 69, sect. 4) writes: The day is to be reckoned from midnight to midnight, as in the case of the ecclesiasticum jejunium naturale. He then proceeds to say: By divine law it is not forbidden to receive Communion more than once on the same day; if one stands upon divine law alone, there is no such prohibition, because it is neither written nor handed down nor can it be proved by reason alone. A proportionate argument can be taken from the same laws, because to offer sacrifice more than once on the same day is not forbidden by divine law; therefore neither is receiving Communion. Hence, just as the Pope sometimes dispenses so that someone may offer sacrifice more than once on the same day, so he could dispense for repeated Communion apart from the sacrifice; therefore it is not forbidden by divine law.

Now Suarez considers the objection: You will say: neither would receiving Communion every hour, or even more frequently in the same hour, be forbidden, and answers: I answer that this is true: concerning this whole matter nothing has been declared by positive divine law but it is left to the prudence which the natural law itself dictates, and which dictates that those things are to be avoided which can occasion contempt or mockery of the Sacrament, concluding: therefore ecclesiastical providence has applied measure and order in these matters.

Suarez had already before this stated: this prohibition to receive frequently on the same day follows from human law, chiefly on account of reverence for so great a Sacrament, lest it should become cheapened through excessive frequency.

4. What law of the Church is there decreeing that Communion is allowed only once on the same day? St. Thomas speaks only of a Consuetudo Ecclesiae (III, qu. 80, art. 10) and in the fourth objection he says: “There would be greater frequency if a person received this Sacrament several times in a day. Therefore it would be praiseworthy for a person to receive Communion several times in a day, which nevertheless the custom of the Church does not have.” Therefore, he does not adduce a precept of the Church further than the custom, practice and usage of the Church; a positive commandment, a lex ecclesiastica expressa, was not known to him. And in solving this objection St. Thomas produces only a mystica congruentia saying: “To the fourth it must be said that, because the Lord says in Luke 11, “Give us this day our daily bread,” Communion is not to be received several times in a day, so that at least by this—that someone receives Communion once in a day—the unity of Christ’s Passion may be represented.”

Let us hear another authority. Claud. Lacroix (I. 6, 673) asks and answers the question: Is it lawful to receive Communion more than once in one day? I answer: Ordinarily it is not lawful, as is gathered from chapter Sufficit 53, De consecratione, distinction 1. The practice of the Church and the usage of the faithful prove this very thing.

5. The authorities appeal as we see to Ecclesiae consuetudo, praxis, usus.

What is a legitima consuetudo?

Gratian undoubtedly gives the proper definition (c. 5, d. 1): Custom is a certain law established by usages, which is accepted in place of law when law is lacking.

The legitima consuetudo is likely to become the law, as not everything in the Church must be regulated by written law. The universal custom prevailing throughout the centuries in the Church, and the interpretation and usage of the Christian people, often have the authority of a written law in the Church. And where there is felt no need, the Church does not usually make special laws and ordinances.

6. What about permission or obligation in the case of a Christian who has received Holy Communion, and upon the same day is brought by sickness or accident so near death that the Viaticum should be administered to him? This has been a mooted question on which learned theologians took opposite sides. Some held that it was not permissible to receive the Viaticum if one had already communicated that same day, as the law of the Church forbids one to receive Communion oftener than once a day. But this reason can no longer be maintained, as the Code (canon 864) declares: “Even if they have been refreshed by Holy Communion on the same day, nevertheless it is strongly to be urged that, when brought into danger of death, they receive Communion again.”

7. While a pastor or confessor has not the right to impose a Church censure of excommunication, or authoritatively to declare that anyone has incurred such, he has at his disposal a temporary prohibitio for preventing and discouraging an improper treatment of the Blessed Sacrament; to exercise this is not only his right, it is also his bounden duty. Between saying Holy Mass and receiving Holy Communion there is an essential difference. The celebration of Mass is a liturgical action executed by the priest as Christ’s representative, in the name of the Church, and the Church can, for important reasons, sanction the repetition of the sacrifice; moreover, the Mass has an objective value and is a special operation of grace for all mankind, in a degree according to the intention and application of the celebrant. Holy Communion, however, bestows a subjective gift of grace upon the worthy recipient, though he may also obtain graces for others.