Article I. On the Obligation of Receiving the Eucharist

I say. The real reception of the Eucharist is necessary for no one by necessity of means unto salvation; but for adult faithful it is necessary by necessity of precept, both divine and ecclesiastical, although not under both species, except for priests alone in the act of celebrating Mass. The reason of the first is taken from the universal practice of the Church, according to which communion is given neither to little children nor to adults hindered by infirmity, for example, to those prone to vomiting, the frenzied, etc. The reason of the second is drawn from the words of Christ, John vi, 54: "Unless you eat the Flesh of the Son of man, and drink His Blood, you shall not have life in you." But the reason of the third and fourth is had from the Council of Trent, where indeed the precept is imposed of receiving the sacrament of the Eucharist at least at Easter, but at the same time anathema is pronounced upon those who assert that it is necessary for all and each of the Christian faithful to receive it under both species. - Cf. Council of Trent, sess. 13, can. 9; and sess. 21, can. 1 and following. - St. Alphonsus, n. 295. - De Augustinis, part. 2, art. 6.

Any baptized person who is not prohibited by law can and must be admitted to holy communion (Can. 853).

It is lawful for no one to receive the Most Holy Eucharist who has already received it on the same day, except in the cases concerning which in can. 858, §1 (Can. 857).

Question 1. At what time does the divine precept of communicating urge?

Resp. Of itself, it obliges both often in life and in the article, or proximate danger, of death. The reason is that the Eucharist was instituted not only by way of spiritual food, by which the soul may be nourished and strengthened; but food must be taken often; and also as Viaticum strengthening against the enemies of salvation.

§1. In danger of death, from whatever cause it proceeds, the faithful are held by the precept of receiving holy communion (Can. 864).

Let Holy Viaticum not be delayed too much for the sick; and let those who exercise care of souls watch diligently that the sick, while fully masters of themselves, are refreshed by it (Can. 865).

The precept of receiving communion is not satisfied by sacrilegious communion (Can. 861).

Christ Himself, however, did not determine how often in life one must approach this sacrament, but left it to the Church to determine. - I said of itself; for accidentally it can oblige even more often in a year, if the Eucharist is necessary for overcoming some grave temptation. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 295.

Question 2. When can or must children communicate?

Resp. §1. The Eucharist is not to be administered to children who, on account of the weakness of age, do not yet have knowledge and taste of this sacrament.

§3. Outside danger of death, fuller knowledge of Christian doctrine and more accurate preparation are deservedly required, namely that by which they may perceive, according to their capacity, at least the mysteries of faith necessary by necessity of means unto salvation, and may devoutly approach the Most Holy Eucharist, according to the measure of their age (Can. 854). - Cf. S. C. de Sacramentis, decree 8 Aug. 1910, nn. II, III, VIII. - Above 691, Q. 8.

Question 3. To whom does it pertain to admit children to first communion?

Resp. §4. Let the judgment concerning the sufficient disposition of children for first communion belong to the priest from confessions, and to their parents or to those who are in the place of parents.¹

§5. But it is the office of the Pastor to watch, even by examination, if he shall prudently judge it opportune, lest children approach the sacred Synaxis before having attained the use of reason or without sufficient disposition; and likewise to take care that those who have attained the use of reason and are sufficiently disposed be refreshed as soon as possible with this divine food (Can. 854).

The obligation of the precept of receiving communion, which burdens the impubes, also and chiefly falls back upon those who must have care of them, that is, upon parents, guardians, the confessor, teachers, and the Pastor (Can. 860).

Parents gravely err who affirm that boys and little girls of seven years, with that knowledge which Canon 854 commemorates, cannot communicate well, but that they must wait until they have reached a greater age. These parents are strictly obliged humbly to subject themselves to the supreme authority of the Church, and to oppose no impediment to priests who, according to that authority, desire to lead children to the Sacred Eucharist. - Cf. Instruction of the Eminent Cardinal Vicar in the City, 15 Oct. 1910.

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1105, n. 46.

Question 4. Is someone held to receive sacred Viaticum, when the danger of death is pressing, if a few days before he communicated from devotion?

Resp. Affirmatively, as it seems; for this precept, from the interpretation of the Church, urges in danger of death for battling spiritual enemies; therefore it is not fulfilled by communion made before the illness. Nevertheless, many deny this, because the precept of communion has already been fulfilled substantially. St. Alphonsus says this opinion is sufficiently probable, at least if the danger of death happens naturally, because through that brief preceding time it already morally began to be imminent, although it was unknown. Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 285. - Lugo, disp. 16, n. 49.

Question 5. Is one who communicated in the morning from devotion held, or can he, when danger of death urges, receive Viaticum?

Resp. §2. Even if they have been refreshed by holy communion on the same day, nevertheless it is greatly to be advised that, when they have been brought into danger of life, they communicate again (Can. 864).

Question 6. Can the Eucharist be given to a sick person who suffers from a cough?

Resp. Affirmatively, because the danger that the sacred species may be rejected together with phlegm is generally absent; and the reason is that the way through which spit is expelled by coughing is not the esophagus, that is, the way through which food and drink are conveyed into the stomach, but is the windpipe, through which respiration extends even to the lungs. Yet if the cough is so constant that it prevents the host from being able to be transmitted into the stomach, then communion will have to be abstained from. Thus the Roman Ritual. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 292.

Question 7. Can the Eucharist be given to a sick person who suffers from continual vomiting?

Resp. Certainly it cannot be given in doubt whether the sick person is about to vomit the sacred particle, because then the sacrament would be exposed to the danger of irreverence. Therefore the whole question is practical and is reduced to assigning the best rule for knowing whether a danger of this kind is present. Now the first rule is to ask the physician, if one is present; the second is to test whether the sick person can retain the particle, by giving him some food or drink, and especially some unconsecrated particle; the third is to see whether the sick person has been free from vomiting for six hours. But this last rule must be applied with discretion, and it must be examined whether the cause of vomiting is some irregular irritation of the stomach or rather regular and periodic. If the first, six hours suffice, indeed even four or three, so that it can prudently be judged that the stomach is settled; if the other, they do not suffice, and it must be investigated how often that periodic vomiting recurs. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 291. - Capellmann, Pastoral Medicine, pp. 157 and following.

Question 8. In danger of death, can or must communion be given to the insane, the half-witted, the delirious, those deprived of the senses, the obsessed, and finally epileptics?

Resp. As regards the insane. - If they have been perpetually insane, according to the Roman Ritual communion must never be given to them. But if they often have lucid intervals and have manifested a desire of communicating, communion can be given to them, indeed must be given, with the danger of irreverence excluded. - Cf. St. Thomas, 3, q. 80, art. 9. - St. Alphonsus, n. 302.

As regards the half-witted. - Communion is to be given to them when they have sufficient discretion to distinguish this heavenly food from others; nevertheless it can be given to them more rarely or more frequently according as the prudent confessor shall have judged. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 303. - Ballerini, note (a), p. 218.

As regards the delirious. - Communion can be given to them if they are able to communicate, with danger of irreverence excluded; some think it is a good practice if an unconsecrated particle is first given to the sick person, and thus it appears whether he can communicate decently. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 292.

As regards those deprived of the senses. - They indeed are dispensed from the precept, since they are capable of observing no law. But the Pastor is not thereby dispensed from the obligation of administering the Eucharist to them, if he has known that they were disposed before the loss of reason. For the sacraments operate ex opere operato in those who desired to receive them before they lost the use of reason. Except, however, if there is danger of irreverence or if it is feared that they cannot swallow the host. - Cf. Gousset, n. 232.

As regards the obsessed. - A distinction must be made: communion is to be denied to them when they are not masters of themselves; otherwise it is to be conceded. Indeed, it is expedient that such persons communicate rather often according to the prudence of the confessor, since the Eucharist is a special remedy for driving away demons.

As regards epileptics. - Communion cannot be given to them when they are in an actual paroxysm, on account of proximate danger of irreverence; but at other times it is not to be denied. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 303.

Question 9. Can communion be given to those condemned capitally?

Resp. Affirmatively. Not only can it be given, but it must be given, as is clear from canon 864, §1. In danger of death, from whatever cause it proceeds, the faithful are held by the precept of receiving holy communion. St. Alphonsus adds that then the precept of fasting does not oblige, nor is it necessary to communicate on the same day of death, although this is laudably done; provided, however, that communion precedes the execution by an hour, so that danger of irreverence is absent. Cf. St. Alphonsus, de quinto praec. Decal., n. 379. - Benedict XIV, de Synod. diaec., lib. 7, cap. 11. - Gousset, n. 230.